论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察老年慢性根尖周炎根管一次性治疗的临床疗效。方法:选择老年慢性根尖周炎192例,随机分为观察组和对照组各96例;观察组采用根管一次性治疗,对照组采用常规根管多次治疗,两组均于根管充填后行光固化树脂严密充填窝洞。术后1天和7天电话随访并记录疼痛反应,1年后进行临床及X线片复查评价,比较两组患牙疼痛发生率及临床疗效。结果:两组根管充填结果均为恰填。术后1天观察组疼痛发生率为37.5%,对照组为31.2%;术后7天观察组疼痛发生率为8.3%,对照组为6.2%;两组术后1天及7天疼痛发生率比较,均差异不显著(P>0.05)。术后1年复查,观察组治疗成功率为91.7%,对照组为93.8%;两组治疗成功率比较,差异不显著(P>0.05)。结论:老年慢性根尖周炎采用根管一次性治疗临床疗效好。
Objective: To observe the clinical effect of one-time root canal treatment of senile chronic apical periodontitis. Methods: A total of 192 elderly patients with chronic periapical periodontitis were randomly divided into observation group (96 cases) and control group (96 cases). The control group received one-time root canal treatment and the control group received multiple conventional root canal treatments. After the line light curing resin filled cavity. One (1) and 7 (superscript th) days postoperatively, the patients were followed up and recorded the pain response. One year later, clinical and X - ray examination was performed to evaluate the incidence of tooth pain and the clinical efficacy. Results: The results of root canal filling in both groups were correct. The incidence of pain in observation group was 37.5% on day 1 postoperatively, and was 31.2% in control group. The incidence of pain was 8.3% in observation group and 6.2% in control group on day 7 postoperatively. The incidence of pain on day 1 and postoperative day 7 Comparison, no significant difference (P> 0.05). One year after the operation, the success rate of observation group was 91.7% and that of the control group was 93.8%. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the success rate of treatment (P> 0.05). Conclusion: The elderly with chronic apical periodontitis with a one-time treatment of clinical curative effect is good.