不同根充的方法治疗牙周牙髓病临床疗效比较.docVIP

不同根充的方法治疗牙周牙髓病临床疗效比较 　　[摘要] 目的 探讨在牙周牙髓疾病患者中应用不同根充方法治疗的差异性。方法 方便选择该院2015年6月―2016年5月收治的72例牙周牙髓疾病患者进行研究，依据根充方式不同分成热牙胶组与冷牙胶组，每组36例，冷牙胶组采用冷牙胶侧方加压充填方式，热牙胶组采用热牙胶垂直加压充填方式，比较两组的治疗效果。结果 治疗后，两组患者VAS的评分数值都明显减小，疼痛症状显著改善，热牙胶组患者改善情况好于冷牙胶组；热牙胶组临床治疗有效率为97.22%，明显高于冷牙胶组72.22%，组间差异有统计学意义（P0.05）。 结论 热牙胶根管充填可以改善患者的临床症状，缓解患者的疼痛感，提高临床治疗效果，具有重要临床价值。 　　[关键词] 牙周牙髓病；根充方法；疗效 　　[中图分类号] R781 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742（2017）12（a）-0058-03 　　[Abstract] Objective To study the treatment difference of different root canal filling methods in treatment of Periodontic-endodontic diseases. Methods 72 cases of patients with periodontic-endodontic diseases admitted and treated in our hospital from June 2015 to May 2016 were conveniently selected and divided into two groups with 36 cases in each according to different methods， the cold gutta percha group adopted the cold lateral compaction， and the warm gutta percha adopted the warm vertical condensation method， and the treatment effect was compared between the two groups. Results After treatment， the VAS scores obviously decreased， and the pain symptoms were obviously improved， and the improvement degree in the warm gutta percha group was better than that of cold gutta percha group， and the clinical treatment effective rate in the warm gutta percha group was obviously higher than that in the cold gutta percha group（97.22% vs 72.22%）， and the difference was obvious with statistical significance（P0.05）. Conclusion The warm gutta percha can improve the clinical symptoms of patients， relieve the pains and improve the treatment effect， and it is of important clinical value. 　　[Key words] Periodontic-endodontic diseases； Root canal filling methods； Curative effect 　　临床上，牙周牙髓病属于口腔科的常见疾病，是牙周炎、根尖周炎、牙髓炎与龋齿等牙齿疾病的总称，发病率较高，容易引起各种症状[1]。因为牙周牙髓疾病不但会引起疼痛，还会影响咀嚼功能，危害患者日常生活与健康，所以需要应用有效方法进行治疗，临床上比较常用的治疗方法为根管治疗[2]。由于根管充填应用材料与操作技术的差异性，导致填充程度存在差异[3]。对此，该次方便选取2015年6月―2016年5月在该院治疗的72例牙周牙髓病患者为研究对象，探讨在根管治疗中不同根充方法治疗效果的差异性，现报道如下。 　　1 资料与方法 　　1.1 一般资料 　　方便选择在该院治疗的72例牙周牙髓病患者，依??