两种不同根管封闭剂治疗慢性根尖周炎的疗效对比.pdf

摘要 目的：评价Apexit Plus 与AHPlus在慢性根尖周炎治疗中的近期及远期临床疗效，为临床中选择合 适的根管封闭剂提供理论支持。 方法：56例诊断为慢性根尖周炎的患者随机分配至Apexit Plus封闭剂组和AHPlus封闭剂组，每组 各28例。比较两组在根管治疗后72小时内的VAS疼痛评分及术后3个月的PAI 评分。 结果：Apexit Plus 组治疗后24小时、48小时的的VAS评分低于AH Plus 组，改善幅度更大，差异 具有统计学意义 （P＜0.05）。Apexit Plus 组与AH Plus组治疗后PAI 评分对比，差异无统计学意义 （P＞0.05）。Apexit Plus 组与AHPlus 治疗后的临床成功率对比，差异无统计学意义 （P＞0.05）。 结论：Apexit Plus封闭剂对慢性根尖周炎的术后疼痛缓解效果优于AH Plus 封闭剂，且两者对根尖 周组织的预后效果无显著差异。 关键词：Apexit Plus根管封闭剂;AHPlus根管封闭剂;慢性根尖周炎;术后疼痛 I Abstract Objective: To evaluate the short-term and long-term clinical efficacy of Apexit Plus and AH Plus in the treatment of chronic periapical periodontitis, and to provide theoretical support for the selection of appropriateroot canal sealersin theclinic. Methods:56patients diagnosedwith chronicperiapicalperiodontitiswererandomly assignedtotheApexit Plus sealer group and the AH Plus sealer group, with 28 cases in each group. VAS pain scores within 72 hours after root canaltreatment and PAI scores at 3months after operation were comparedbetween thetwo groups. Results: Apexit Plus groups VAS scores at 24 and 48 hours after treatment were lower than those ofAH Plus group, and the improvement was greater, and the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05).There was no significant difference in PAI score between Apexit Plus group and AH Plus group after treatment (P 0.05).There was no significant difference in clinical success rate between Apexit Plus group andAHPlusgroup aftertreatment (P 0.05). Conclusion: Apexit Plus sealer has better postoperative pain relief effect than AH Plus sealer in chronic periapical periodontitis, and there is no significant difference in the prognostic effect of the two on periapicaltissue. Key words: Apexit Plus root canal sealer;AH Plus root canal sealer;chronic periapical periodontitis;postoperativepain