上海口腔医学

上海口腔医学 ›› 2022, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (1): 44-47.doi: 10.19439/j.sjos.2022.01.009

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

4种镍钛器械预备弯曲根管后成形能力比较

江慧超1, 汤玲玲2, 韩文利3   

  1. 1.大连市口腔医院 牙体牙髓病科,2.高尔基路门诊部,3.放射科,辽宁 大连 116021
  • 收稿日期:2020-03-17 修回日期:2020-04-28 出版日期:2022-02-25 发布日期:2022-03-10
  • 通讯作者: 江慧超,E-mail：julia7690193@163.com
  • 作者简介:江慧超（1983-）,女,硕士,副主任医师
  • 基金资助:
    大连市医学科学研究计划（1811094）

Comparison of shaping ability of 4 nickel-titanium rotary instruments in preparation of curved root canals

JIANG Hui-chao1, TANG Ling-ling2, HAN Wen-li3   

  1. 1. Department of Cariology and Endodontology, 2. Gaoerji Road Clinical Division, 3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Dalian Stomatological Hospital. Dalian 116021, Liaoning Province, China
  • Received:2020-03-17 Revised:2020-04-28 Online:2022-02-25 Published:2022-03-10

PDF (PC)

181

摘要： 目的: 比较4种镍钛器械预备弯曲根管后的成形能力。方法: 收集临床上拔除的近颊根牙根弯曲度在20°~40°的上颌第一或第二恒磨牙40颗,随机分为4组,每组10颗,分别采用Protaper Universal、Protaper Next、TF、S3对近颊根进行根管预备。预备前、后采用Micro-CT扫描,使用Mimics17.0软件分析测量,分析参数包括根管偏移、轴中心率、根管体积、牙本质去除量、根管/牙根宽度比。采用SPSS 20.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果: 在距根尖1、3、5 mm处,Protaper Universal偏移值较大,与其他3种器械相比,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）;在距根尖1 mm处,Protaper Universal的中心定位能力较差,与其他3种器械具有统计学差异（P<0.05）。预备后,各组之间牙本质去除量有统计学差异（P<0.05）,Protaper Universal预备后的牙本质去除量最多。在根管冠方和根中,预备后的根管直径均小于该处牙根直径的39%。结论: Protaper Next、TF、S3较Protaper Universal更适合用于弯曲根管预备。

关键词: 镍钛器械, 根管预备, 根管偏移, 弯曲根管, Micro-CT

Abstract: PRUPOSE: To compare the shaping ability of 4 nickel-titanium rotary instruments in preparation of curved root canals. METHODS: Forty extracted human maxillary first or second molars with mesiobuccal root canal curvature ranging from 20°-40° were selected. The teeth were randomly equally divided into 4 groups(n=10). Mesial root canals were separately prepared using Protaper Universal, Protaper Next, TF, and S3 nickel-titanium instruments. A series of preoperative and postoperative images were taken by Micro-CT. Mimics 17.0 software was used to analyze the following parameters: canal transportation, centering ratio values, root canal volume, volume of removed dentin, and canal/root width ratio. Data analysis was performed by using SPSS 20.0 software package. RESULTS: In terms of canal transportation after preparation at 1, 3 and 5 mm from the apex, Protaper Universal was more than the other three groups(P<0.05). The centering ratio value of Protaper Universal was significantly smaller than that of the other three groups at 1 mm from the apex(P<0.05). The amount of dentin removal was significantly different after instrumentation with the four test systems(P<0.05). Protaper Universal had the highest mean volume of removed dentin. After preparation, all root canals had a diameter that was not larger than 39% of the root diameter at the coronal and middle segments. CONCLUSIONS: Under the conditions of this study, Protaper Next, TF, S3 systems seem to be better choices than Protaper Universal system in preparing curved root canals.

Key words: Nickel-Titanium rotary instrument, Root canal preparation, Canal transportation, Curved root canal, Micro-computed tomography

中图分类号: