不同荡洗策略治疗有瘘型慢性根尖周炎的临床效果比较

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2023.02.014

上海口腔医学 ›› 2023, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (2): 188-192.doi: 10.19439/j.sjos.2023.02.014

不同荡洗策略治疗有瘘型慢性根尖周炎的临床效果比较

刘慧楠^1,2, 张富华^1,2,3, 蒲灼光^1,2

1.安徽医科大学合肥口腔临床学院,安徽合肥 230001;
2.安徽医科大学第五临床医学院,安徽合肥 230001;
3.合肥市口腔医院牙体牙髓病科,安徽合肥 230001

收稿日期:2022-09-20 修回日期:2022-10-22 出版日期:2023-04-25 发布日期:2023-06-13
通讯作者: 张富华,E-mail:zfh1024@163.com
作者简介:刘慧楠（1994-）,女,在读硕士研究生,住院医师,E-mail:lhnlzz0925@163.com
基金资助:
2021年合肥市卫建委应用医学研究项目(Hwk2021zc005)

Comparison of clinical effects of different irrigant solutions combined with different agitation techniques in the treatment of chronic apical periodontitis with fistula

LIU Hui-nan^1,2, ZHANG Fu-hua^1,2,3, PU Zhuo-guang^1,2

1. Hefei College of Stomatology, Anhui Medical University. Hefei 230001;
2. The Fifth Clinical Medical College of Anhui Medical University. Hefei 230001;
3. Department of Endodontics, Hefei Stomatological Hospital. Hefei 230001, Anhui Province, China

Received:2022-09-20 Revised:2022-10-22 Online:2023-04-25 Published:2023-06-13

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的: 评价辅助冲洗技术和根管冲洗液联合治疗有瘘型慢性根尖周炎的效果,寻求一种更有效、更微创的临床治疗策略。方法: 选择2021年1月—2022年1月在合肥市口腔医院治疗的有瘘型慢性根尖周炎患者150例,随机分为6组,每组25例。A组—0.5%次氯酸钠+超声荡洗;B组—1.0%次氯酸钠+超声荡洗;C组—2.0%氯己定+超声荡洗;D组—0.5%次氯酸钠+声波荡洗;E组—1.0%次氯酸钠+声波荡洗;F组—2.0%氯己定+声波荡洗。观察每组瘘管愈合时间、治疗效果以及术后疼痛情况。采用SPSS 20.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果: 瘘管愈合方面,E组和F组10天瘘管愈合率显著高于A组和D组（P<0.05）,但E组与F组之间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。治疗效果方面,A组术后1个月有效率较低,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。术后疼痛方面,A组VAS评分在所有时间点均显著小于E组和F组（P<0.05）。结论: 治疗有瘘型慢性根尖周炎时,使用1.0%次氯酸钠或2.0%氯己定联合声波荡洗或超声波荡洗,可获得短期较好的效果,其中声波荡洗组还可获得瘘管早期愈合,但是使用声波荡洗时,术后疼痛发生率较高。

关键词: 次氯酸钠, 氯己定, 超声波荡洗, 声波荡洗, 慢性根尖周炎

Abstract: PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of combination of auxiliary irrigation technology and root canal irrigation solution in the treatment of chronic apical periodontitis with fistula, and try to seek a more effective and minimally invasive therapeutic strategy. METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients with fistulous chronic apical periodontitis who were diagnosed in Hefei Stomatological Hospital from January 2021 to January 2022 were randomly divided into 6 groups, 25 cases in each group. The 6 groups were as follows, group A: 0.5%NaOCl +ultrasonically activated irrigation; Group B: 1.0%NaOCl+ultrasonically activated irrigation; Group C: 2.0%CHX+ultrasonically activated irrigation; Group D: 0.5%NaOCl+sonic activation; Group E: 1.0%NaOCl+sonic activation; Group F: 2.0%CHX+sonic activation. The fistula healing time, treatment effect and postoperative pain were observed in each group. The data were analyzed with SPSS 20.0 software package. RESULTS: In terms of fistula healing, the 10-day fistula healing rate of group E and group F was higher than that of group A and group D,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05); but there was no significant difference between group E and group F (P>0.05). The effective rate at 1 month after operation in group A was lower, and the difference was significant (P<0.05). In terms of postoperative pain, the VAS score of group A was lower than that of group E and group F at all time points, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of chronic apical periodontitis with fistula, 1.0% NaOCl or 2.0% CHX combined with ultrasonically activated irrigation or sonic activation obtain a better short-term effect,of which the sonic activation group can also obtain early healing of the fistula, but the incidence of postoperative pain is higher when sonic activation is used.

Key words: Sodium hypochlorite, Chlorhexidine, Ultrasonically activated irrigation, Sonic activation, Chronic apical periodontitis

中图分类号:

R781.34

刘慧楠, 张富华, 蒲灼光. 不同荡洗策略治疗有瘘型慢性根尖周炎的临床效果比较[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(2): 188-192.

LIU Hui-nan, ZHANG Fu-hua, PU Zhuo-guang. Comparison of clinical effects of different irrigant solutions combined with different agitation techniques in the treatment of chronic apical periodontitis with fistula[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2023, 32(2): 188-192.

参考文献

[1] Croitoru IC, Crăitoiu S, Petcu CM, et al.Clinical, imagistic and histopathological study of chronic apical periodontitis[J]. Rom J Morphol Embryol, 2016, 57(2 Suppl): 719-728.
[2] Artaza L, F Campello A, Soimu G, et al. Clinical and radiographic outcome of the root canal treatment of infected teeth with associated sinus tract: a retrospective study[J]. Aust Endod J, 2021, 47(3): 599-607.
[3] Tanomaru-Filho M, Miano LM, Chávez-Andrade GM, et al.Cleaning of root canal system by different irrigation methods[J]. J Contemp Dent Pract, 2015, 16(11): 859-863.
[4] Orstavik D, Kerekes K, Eriksen HM.The periapical index: a scoring system for radiographic assessment of apical periodontitis[J]. Endod Dent Traumatol, 1986, 2(1): 20-34.
[5] Weiger R, Rosendahl R, Löst C.Influence of calcium hydroxide intracanal dressings on the prognosis of teeth with endodontically induced periapical lesions[J]. Int Endod J, 2000, 33(3): 219-226.
[6] Okifuji A, Mitsunaga R, Kida Y, et al.The visual time analog scale: simple, novel measurement approach to assess pain in patients with chronic pain[J]. Pain Manag, 2021, 11(4): 357-368.
[7] Nakamura VC, Pinheiro ET, Prado LC, et al.Effect of ultrasonic activation on the reduction of bacteria and endotoxins in root canals: a randomized clinical trial[J]. Int Endod J, 2018, 51(Suppl 1):e12-e22.
[8] Kishen A, Shrestha A, Del Carpio-Perochena A. Validation of biofilm assays to assess antibiofilm efficacy in instrumented root canals after syringe irrigation and sonic agitation[J]. J Endod, 2018, 44(2): 292-298.
[9] Rodrigues RCV, Zandi H, Kristoffersen AK, et al.Influence of the apical preparation size and the irrigant type on bacterial reduction in root canal-treated teeth with apical periodontitis[J]. J Endod, 2017, 43(7): 1058-1063.
[10] 梁宇红,岳林. 根管治疗技术之根管的化学预备和消毒[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2019, 54(11): 788-792.
[11] Gonçalves LS, Rodrigues RC, Andrade Junior CV, et al.The effect of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine as irrigant solutions for root canal disinfection: a systematic review of clinical trials[J]. J Endod, 2016, 42(4): 527-532.
[12] Rosenthal S, Spångberg L, Safavi K.Chlorhexidine substantivity in root canal dentin[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 2004, 98(4): 488-492.
[13] Orlowski NB, Schimdt TF, Teixeira CDS, et al.Smear layer removal using passive ultrasonic irrigation and different concentrations of sodium hypochlorite[J]. J Endod, 2020, 46(11): 1738-1744.
[14] de Gregorio C, Estevez R, Cisneros R, et al. Effect of EDTA, sonic, and ultrasonic activation on the penetration of sodium hypochlorite into simulated lateral canals: an in vitro study[J]. J Endod, 2009, 35(6): 891-895.
[15] Ulin C, Magunacelaya-Barria M, Dahlén G, et al.Immediate clinical and microbiological evaluation of the effectiveness of 0.5% versus 3% sodium hypochlorite in root canal treatment: a quasi-randomized controlled trial[J]. Int Endod J, 2020, 53(5): 591-603.
[16] Hoedke D, Kaulika N, Dommisch H, et al.Reduction of dual-species biofilm after sonic- or ultrasonic-activated irrigation protocols: a laboratory study[J]. Int Endod J, 2021, 54(12): 2219-2228.
[17] Tungsawat P, Arunrukthavorn P, Phuntusuntorn P, et al.Comparison of the effect of three irrigation techniques and root canal preparation size on sodium hypochlorite penetration into root canal dentinal tubules[J]. Int J Dent, 2021: 6612588.
[18] Behrents KT, Speer ML, Noujeim M.Sodium hypochlorite accident with evaluation by cone beam computed tomography[J]. Int Endod J, 2012, 45(5): 492-498.
[19] Arias A, de la Macorra JC, Hidalgo JJ, et al. Predictive models of pain following root canal treatment: a prospective clinical study[J]. Int Endod J, 2013, 46(8): 784-793.
[20] Magni E, Jäggi M, Eggmann F, et al.Apical pressures generated by several canal irrigation methods: a laboratory study in a maxillary central incisor with an open apex[J]. Int Endod J, 2021, 54(10):1937-1947.

不同荡洗策略治疗有瘘型慢性根尖周炎的临床效果比较

Comparison of clinical effects of different irrigant solutions combined with different agitation techniques in the treatment of chronic apical periodontitis with fistula

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	江煜, 石磊, 蔡佳. 超声冲洗结合氯己定在牙髓炎根管治疗中的应用效果评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2024, 33(2): 170-174.
[2]	谢惠兰, 陈江, 曹白雨, 林毅. 负载氯己定的埃洛石纳米管对牙本质粘结强度的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(5): 471-475.
[3]	贾舸, 于淼, 尚新华, 吴建华, 翟沁凯. 根管治疗慢性根尖周炎5年预后及影响因素分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2021, 30(2): 124-128.
[4]	俞梅, 喻锦娴, 王玮. 牙髓血运重建术对慢性根尖周炎趋化因子CCL21、干扰素γ诱导蛋白10水平的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2020, 29(6): 628-631.
[5]	程刚, 王留宏, 杨惠, 娄新田, 王一霖. 氯己定联合机械清创对种植体周围炎的治疗效果及对患者SF-36评分的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2020, 29(4): 400-404.
[6]	荆得宝, 王丽琴, 胡玉凤, 朱静. 氯己定预处理牙本质后对自酸蚀粘接剂粘结效果的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2020, 29(2): 150-154.
[7]	汪嘉, 赵申, 冉淑君, 孙喆, 梁景平. 不同根管冲洗方式对粪肠球菌生物膜清除效果评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2019, 28(3): 246-250.
[8]	王丝墨, 马楠, 仇丽鸿, 李晓琳, 杨谛, 薛明. SOCS-1和SOCS-3在慢性根尖周炎病损组织中的表达及临床意义[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2017, 26(4): 384-388.
[9]	孙楚文, 朱亚琴. 不同根管消毒方法对粪肠球菌清除作用的体外研究[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2017, 26(2): 134-138.
[10]	闫磊, 王新迎, 万娜, 尹艳娇, 吴佩玲. 汉族与维吾尔族慢性根尖周炎患者根管治疗后疼痛差异及口服布洛芬后镇痛效果比较[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2017, 26(2): 217-221.
[11]	赵聪, 迟爽, 李彤, 李贺, 李天博, 张志民. MMPs抑制剂对湿性黏结微渗漏的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2016, 25(5): 548-552.
[12]	陈晖, 张旸, 汪俊. 全脱位牙延期再植根面牙周膜不同去除方法的比较[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2016, 25(3): 296-300.
[13]	马楠，曲柳，徐莉雅，于雅琼，仇丽鸿. IL-34在慢性根尖周病损组织中的表达及临床意义[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2016, 25(1): 53-57.
[14]	徐莉雅, 马楠, 仇丽鸿, 于雅琼, 钟鸣, 于静涛, 薛明. Wnt5a在慢性根尖周炎病损中的表达及临床意义[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2015, 24(4): 470-474.
[15]	张凌, 朱琳琳, 张梦龙. 不同冲洗液对根尖溢出碎屑的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2014, 23(6): 695-698.