口腔疾病防治 ›› 2019, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (2): 95-99.DOI: 10.12016/j.issn.2096-1456.2019.02.005

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同机用镍钛器械在树脂模拟根管内成形能力的比较

张笑维,梁景平,孙喆()   

  1. 上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院牙体牙髓科,上海市口腔医学研究所,上海市口腔医学重点实验室 国家口腔疾病临床研究中心,上海(200011)
  • 收稿日期:2018-04-17 修回日期:2018-05-27 出版日期:2019-02-20 发布日期:2019-02-21
  • 通讯作者: 孙喆
  • 作者简介:张笑维,住院医师,硕士, Email: zhangxiaowei021@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(81271133)

Comparison of the shaping ability of different nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals in resin

ZHANG Xiaowei,LIANG Jingping,SUN Zhe()   

  1. Department of Endodontics, Ninth People’s Hospital, Shanghai JiaoTong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology & Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center of Stomatology , Shanghai 200011, China
  • Received:2018-04-17 Revised:2018-05-27 Online:2019-02-20 Published:2019-02-21
  • Contact: Zhe SUN

摘要:

目的 比较3种机用镍钛器械在预备树脂模拟弯曲根管时的成形能力,以期为临床提供参考。方法 将48个树脂模拟弯曲根管随机分为4组,每组12个,分别使用F360(组1)、F6 SkyTaper(20/06)(组2)、F6 SkyTaper(25/06)(组3)、Reciproc R25(组4)进行根管预备,使用体视显微镜拍摄预备前后的根管图像,利用Photoshop软件进行图像重叠,以根尖孔为圆心,每隔1 mm作一同心圆,测量根管内外侧壁树脂去除量,计算中心定位能力。使用SPSS 20.0软件进行统计学分析。结果 在距根尖孔1 mm位点,组4的偏移程度为(0.10 ± 0.03)mm,显著大于组2的(0.05 ± 0.03)mm和组3的(0.05 ± 0.03)mm(P < 0.05);在距根尖孔8 mm和9 mm处,组4的偏移程度分别为(0.12 ± 0.06)mm、(0.13 ± 0.05)mm,显著大于组2的(0.05 ± 0.05)mm、(0.05 ± 0.05)mm和组3的(0.05 ± 0.04)mm、(0.06 ± 0.05)mm(P < 0.05);在距根尖孔10 mm处,组4的偏移程度为(0.13 ± 0.06)mm,显著大于组2的(0.06 ± 0.06)mm(P < 0.05)。结论 F6 SkyTaper相对于Reciproc的中心定位能力更好,可以在根管预备过程中更好的保持树脂弯曲根管的原始形态。

关键词: 镍钛器械, 树脂根管, 弯曲根管, 根管预备, 成形能力

Abstract:

Objective To compare the shaping ability of 3 different nickel (Ni)-titanium (Ti) systems in simulated root canals in resin and to provide a reference for clinicians.Methods Forty-eight resin blocks were prepared using the F360 (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 1), F6 SkyTaper (20/06) (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 2), F6 SkyTaper (25/06) (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 3) and Reciproc R25 systems (VDW, Munich, Germany) (Group 4) (n=12 canals/group). The images taken before and after preparation were superimposed and analyzed by Adobe Photoshop v7.0. The amount of resin removed by each system was measured, and the centering ability was assessed. The data were statistically analyzed using SPSS 20.0.Results At the 1 mm point, the transportation in Group 4 [(0.10 ± 0.03) mm] was significantly greater than that in Groups 2 [(0.05 ± 0.03) mm] and 3 [(0.05 ± 0.03) mm] (P < 0.05). At the 8 mm and 9 mm points, the transportation values in Group 4 [(0.12 ± 0.06) mm and (0.13 ± 0.05) mm] were significantly higher than those in Groups 2 [(0.05 ± 0.05) mm and (0.05 ± 0.05) mm] and 3 [(0.05 ± 0.04) mm and (0.06 ± 0.05) mm] (P < 0.05). At the 10 mm point, the transportation was significantly greater in Group 4 [(0.13 ± 0.06) mm] than in Group 2 [(0.06 ± 0.06) mm].Conclusion F6 SkyTaper exhibits better centering ability than Reciproc.

Key words: Nickel-titanium instruments, Simulated root canals in resin, Curved root canal, Root canal preparation, Shaping ability

中图分类号: