论文部分内容阅读
目的评价Er∶YAG激光联合盖髓剂应用于乳牙直接盖髓术的临床疗效及治疗过程疼痛程度。方法选择2014年3—6月成都市妇女儿童中心医院口腔科门诊就诊的60例3~6岁因龋治疗低龄患儿,随机分为4组,每组15例,分别为Er∶YAG激光去龋+矿物三氧化物凝聚体(MTA)组、Er∶YAG激光去龋+氢氧化钙(CH)组、传统手机去龋+MTA组、传统手机去龋+CH组,记录患儿出现明显疼痛时的备洞深度。治疗后第3、6、12、24个月进行回访,通过拍摄X线片观察各组临床疗效。结果使用传统手机和Er∶YAG激光患儿记录的备洞深度(牙本质浅层、牙本质中层、牙本质深层)数目比例分别为50.0%、40.0%、10.0%和0.67%、20.0%、79.33%,传统手机和Er∶YAG激光备洞疼痛差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。第3、6、12个月回访时,Er∶YAG激光组成功率略高于传统手机,但4组成功率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。第24个月回访时,2个Er∶YAG激光组临床疗效成功率均为93.3%,与传统手机组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);传统手机+MTA及传统手机+CH组的成功率分别为80%(12/15)和73%(11/15),两组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 Er∶YAG激光备洞过程产生痛感小,低龄患儿易于接受和配合治疗。Er∶YAG激光联合使用盖髓材料的临床疗效成功率高于传统手机联合盖髓剂。MTA与CH用作直接盖髓术的临床疗效比较差异无统计学意义。
Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy of Er: YAG laser combined with pulp capping agent in the treatment of deciduous teeth and the degree of pain during the treatment. Methods From March to June 2014, 60 cases of children aged 3 to 6 years old with dental caries treated in Department of Stomatology, Chengdu Women and Children’s Hospital were randomly divided into 4 groups (n = 15 each) with Er:YAG laser Dental caries + mineral aggregates (MTA) group, Er:YAG laser caries + calcium hydroxide (CH) group, the traditional mobile phone caries + MTA group, the traditional cell phone caries + CH group, recorded significant pain in children When the hole depth. At the 3rd, 6th, 12th and 24th months after treatment, the patients were interviewed and the clinical effects were observed by radiography. Results The number of deep holes (shallow dentin, middle dentin, deep dentin) recorded by traditional mobile phones and Er: YAG laser was 50.0%, 40.0%, 10.0% and 0.67%, 20.0% and 79.33, respectively %, There is significant difference between traditional handpiece and Er:YAG laser hole preparation (P <0.05). At the 3rd, 6th and 12th month of follow-up, the compositional power of Er:YAG laser was slightly higher than that of the traditional mobile phones, but there was no significant difference in the success rates of the 4 components (P> 0.05). At the 24th month of follow-up visit, the success rate of clinical efficacy of the two ErYYAG laser groups was 93.3%, which was significantly different from that of the traditional cell phone group (P <0.05). The traditional cell phone + MTA and traditional cell phone + CH group The success rates were 80% (12/15) and 73% (11/15) respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). Conclusion ErYYAG laser hole preparation process has a small pain, young children are easy to accept and cooperate with the treatment. The success rate of clinical efficacy of Er: YAG laser in combination with pulp capping material is higher than that of traditional cell phone joint capping agent. There was no significant difference in clinical curative effect between MTA and CH for direct capping.