首页|期刊导航|现代医药卫生|不同根管封闭剂结合单尖法封闭椭圆形根管欠预备最大长度限度的研究

不同根管封闭剂结合单尖法封闭椭圆形根管欠预备最大长度限度的研究OA

Evaluation of the maximum length limit of underprepared oval-shaped canals sealed with different root canal sealers using the single-cone technique

中文摘要英文摘要

目的 探讨iRoot SP和iMTA SP 2种生物陶瓷类根管封闭剂结合单尖法,在机械预备欠预备不同长度时对椭圆形根管充填长度的影响,评估其临床应用价值.方法 选取100颗符合纳入标准的离体前磨牙,随机均分为4组,对应欠预备长度0、2、4、6 mm.每组分为3个亚组,其中 AH Plus对照组样本数为5个,iRoot SP和iMTA SP组样本数均为10个,采用iRoot SP和iMTA SP封闭剂时,结合单尖法充填.分析各组充填后欠充填长度的差异.结果 欠预备长度0 mm和2 mm组,3种封闭剂恰填率均为100.0%;欠预备长度大于2 mm后,AH Plus组恰填率为0;欠预备长度4 mm组,iMTA SP组恰填率为100.0%,高于iRoot SP组(90.0%).欠预备长度6 mm组,iMTA SP组欠充填长度明显较iRoot SP组短,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),其恰填率为80.0%,高于iRoot SP组(40.0%),iRoot SP组内只有在欠预备长度6 mm 组分别与0、2 mm组欠充填长度比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),其余组内欠充填长度比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 根管治疗机械欠预备时,iRoot SP封闭剂适用于欠预备长度4 mm 以内的椭圆形根管;iMTA SP封闭剂可用于欠预备长度6 mm以内的椭圆形根管,临床应用价值更优.

Objective To investigate the impact of iRoot SP and iMTA SP bioceramic root canal sealers combined with the single-cone technique on the filling length of oval root canals with insufficient mechanical preparation,and assess their clinical value.Methods A total of 100 extracted premolars were randomly divid-ed into four groups with 0,2,4,and 6 mm of insufficient preparation.Each group was further divided into three subgroups.The control group(AH Plus)had 5 specimens,while the iRoot SP and iMTA SP groups each had 10 specimens.For specimens sealed with iRoot SP and iMTA SP,the single-cone technique was used for obturation.The underfilling length after obturation was compared among all groups.Results In the 0 mm and 2 mm underprepared length groups,the rate of optimal filling was 100.0%for all three sealers.However,when the underprepared length exceeded 2 mm,When the underprepared length exceeded 2 mm,the optimal filling rate in the AH Plus group dropped to 0;in the 4 mm underprepared length group,the iMTA SP group achieved an optimal filling rate of 100.0%,which was higher than that of the iRoot SP group(90.0%).In the 6 mm underprepared length group,the underfilling length in the iMTA SP group was significantly shorter than that in the iRoot SP group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The optimal filling rate in the iMTA SP group was 80.0%,which was higher than that in the iRoot SP group(40.0%).Within the iRoot SP group,significant differences in underfilling length were observed only between the 6 mm under-prepared length group and the 0 mm and 2 mm groups(P<0.05),while no significant differences were found among the other subgroups(P>0.05).Conclusion When mechanical preparation is underprepared,iRoot SP is suitable for oval-shaped root canals with underpreparation lengths within 4 mm,while iMTA SP has a broa-der application range,extending to underpreparation lengths up to 6 mm.

蒋宇;于洪友

重庆市渝北区中医院口腔科,重庆 401120||大连大学口腔医学院,辽宁 大连 116022大连大学口腔医学院,辽宁 大连 116022

医药卫生

张口受限椭圆形根管欠预备根管封闭剂单尖法

Limitation of mouth openingElliptical root canalIncomplete preparationRoot ca-nal sealerSingle-cone technique

《现代医药卫生》 2026 (4)

795-799,5

10.3969/j.issn.1009-5519.2026.04.014

评论