目的：探讨ProTaper专用牙胶及普通大锥度牙胶在临床中的应用方法及效果。方法：离体单根管恒牙132个，粗、细根管各66个，分别随机分为6组，每组10个，余12个分别作为阳性和阴性对照；比较普通大锥度牙胶尖（Genl-主尖）和ProTaper专用牙胶尖（Pro-主尖）在根管充填效率和封闭性方面的差异；结合染料渗透法和透明标本法，测量根尖微渗漏长度以评价各组根尖封闭能力。结果：细根管Pro-主尖和Genl-主尖在充填时间及根尖封闭性方面无显著差异；粗根管：使用Pro-主尖进行冷侧压充填比使用Genl-主尖更节省充填时间，但两者根尖封闭性方面无显著差别，粗大根管用热牙胶充填法更节省时间；使用Pro-主尖或Genl-主尖进行单尖充填的根尖封闭效果均不佳。结论：ProTaper专用牙胶尖不适合进行单尖充填；对于较粗大根管进行冷侧压充填，使用ProTaper专用牙胶较使用普通锥度牙胶更节省充填时间。%AIM:To compare the effects of ProTaper gutta percha (Pro-gutta)and general gutta percha (Genl-gutta)in the obturation of root canals.METHODS:132 extracted single-rooted teeth (66 with large and 66 with small diameter root canal)were used in this study.The small and large diameter root canal teeth were randomly divided into 6 groups(n=10),other 12 teeth were used as the controls.After root canal preparation,the canals were filled with Pro-gutta and Genl-gutta respectively.Root canal obturation and apical microleakage were evaluated by X-ray examination and dye penetration.RESULTS:For small diameter root canals,no difference was found between Pro-gutta and Genl-gutta groups in operation time and apical sealing ability.For large diameter root canals,the two groups showed similar apical sealing ability.But it took less time using Pro-gutta than using Genl-gutter by lateral pressure obturation method.No difference was found in operation time between the two groups by warm vertical conden-sation method.CONCLUSION:It takes less operation time for obturation of large diameter root canals using ProTaper gutta percha with lateral pressure obturation technique.
展开▼
