«上一篇/Previous Article|本期目录/Table of Contents|下一篇/Next Article»

《中国美容医学》[ISSN:1008-6445/CN:61-1347/R]

卷:

期数:

2020年9期

页码:

148-151

栏目:

出版日期:

2020-09-10

文章信息/Info

Title:

 Influence of Two Repair Methods on the Repair Effects of Patients with Massive Tooth
Defects after Molar Root Canal Therapy

文章编号:

1008-6455（2020）09-0148-04

作者:

 何 娟; 李 鹏

Author(s):

 HE Juan;  LI Peng

关键词:

 [关键词]磨牙根管治疗; 牙体大面积缺损; 玻璃纤维桩核; 髓腔固位冠; 咀嚼效率

Keywords:

 Key words: molar root canal therapy;  massive tooth defects;  glass fiber post and core;  endocrown;  chewing efficiency

分类号:

R783.4

文献标志码:

A

摘要:

[摘要]目的：探讨两种修复方式对根管治疗后牙体大面积缺损患者的修复效果。方法：回顾性分析2017年6月-2018年6月笔
者科室收治的103例患者（116颗）磨牙根管治疗后牙体大面积缺损的临床资料，根据修复方法将患者分为全冠组（n =56，63
颗）和髓腔固位冠组（n =47，53颗）。全冠组采用玻璃纤维桩核和全冠修复，髓腔固定冠组采用髓腔固定冠修复。修复6个
月、12个月后，评估患者修复体佩戴情况[改良美国公共健康协会修订标准（USPHS）]、患者主观满意度[口腔健康影响程
度量表（OHIP-14）、舒适度]，修复前、修复6个月后、12个月后，评估患者咀嚼效率值，记录随访期内患者不良事件。结
果：①修复6个月、12个月后，两组边缘密合度、修复体外形、边缘着色、颜色匹配度、继发龋及表面质地A级率对比，差异
均无统计学意义（P ＞0.05）；②修复12个月后，两组OHIP-14得分均低于修复6个月后（P ＜0.05），两组舒适度得分均高于
修复6个月后（P ＜0.05）；修复6个月、12个月后，两组OHIP、舒适度得分组间对比差异均无统计学意义（P ＞0.05）；③修
复6个月、12个月后，两组咀嚼效率均呈上升趋势（P ＜0.05），两组组间对比差异无统计学意义（P ＞0.05），修复时间与
不同修复方法间不存在交互效应（P ＞0.05）；④两组不良事件发生率对比，差异无统计学意义（P ＞0.05）。结论：全冠和
髓腔固位冠修复根管治疗后磨牙大面积缺损均效果良好，且两种修复方法短期内修复效果、咀嚼效率均相近。

Abstract:

Abstract:Objective To explore the repair effects of two repair methods on patients with massive tooth defects after molar root
canal therapy. Methods The clinical data of 103 patients (116 teeth) with massive tooth defects after molar root canal therapy
from June 2017 to June 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into full crown group (n =56,63 teeth)
and endocrown group (n =47,53 teeth) according to the repair methods. Full crown group was given glass fiber post and core
and full crown for repair while endocrown group was given endocrown for repair. After 6 months and 12 months of repair, the
wearing of restorations [modified US Public Health Association Revised Standard (USPHS)] and patient subjective satisfaction
[Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14), comfort] were assessed. Before repair and after 6 months and 12 months of repair, the
chewing efficiency value was evaluated, and the adverse events during follow-up were recorded. Results After 6 months and
12 months of repair, there were no significant differences in the proportions of grade A of margin fitness, restoration shape,
margin coloration, color matching degree, secondary caries and surface texture between the two groups (P ＞0.05). After 12
months of repair, the scores of OHIP-14 in the two groups were lower than those after 6 months of repair (P ＜0.05), and the
comfort scores in the two groups were higher than those after 6 months of repair (P ＜0.05). After 6 months and 12 months
of repair, there were no significant differences in the scores of OHIP and comfort between the two groups (P ＞0.05). After 6
months and 12 months of repair, the chewing efficiency in the two groups showed an upward trend (P ＜0.05), and there was no
significant difference between the two groups (P ＞0.05), and there were no interaction effects between repair time and different
repair methods (P ＞0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence rate of adverse events between the
two groups (P ＞0.05). Conclusion Full crown and endocrown both have good effects on massive molar tooth defects after root
canal therapy, and the two repair methods have similar repair effects and chewing efficiency in the short term.

常用功能

更新日期/Last Update: 2020-09-28