SEM观察Qmix、MTAD与EDTA去除根管玷污层效果的体外对比研究

详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

英文篇名：The effects of root canal smear layer removal of Qmix,MTAD and EDTA observed under scanning electron microscope: An in vitro study 作者：赵琦 ; 尹艳娇 ; 张志纯 英文作者：ZHAO Qi;YIN Yanjiao;ZHANG Zhichun;Jinzhou Medical University;Department of Stomatology,The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University;Jinzhou Stomatological Hospital; 关键词：根管玷污层 ; 扫描电镜 ; 根管冲洗 ; Qmix 英文关键词：Root canal irrigation smear layer;;SEM;;Root canal irrigation;;Qmix 中文刊名：SYKQ 英文刊名：Journal of Practical Stomatology 机构：锦州医科大学;新疆医科大学第二附属医院口腔科;拜博医疗集团有限公司沈阳大东拜博拜尔口腔门诊部;锦州市口腔医院; 出版日期：2018-11-30 出版单位：实用口腔医学杂志 年：2018 期：v.34;No.173 语种：中文; 页：SYKQ201806031 页数：4 CN：06 ISSN：61-1062/R 分类号：115-118

摘要

目的:探讨Qmix、MTAD与EDTA 3种冲洗液在不同冲洗温度和冲洗时间作用下清除根管玷污层的效果。方法:纳入240颗离体单根前牙,采机用Protaper next镍钛锉进行根管机械预备并以1%次氯酸钠为基础冲洗液,实验分组根据终末冲洗液不同分成4组:Qmix组、MTAD组、EDTA组(阳性对照组)与生理盐水组(阴性对照组),每组再根据冲洗温度和冲洗时间随机均分为6小组(n=10),分别为4℃30 s组、4℃60 s组、20℃30 s组、20℃60 s、37℃30 s组和37℃60 s组。SEM观察分析根管壁玷污层清除的效果。结果:Qmix组、MTAD组、EDTA组去除根管玷污层效果优于生理盐水组(P <0. 001),Qmix组玷污层清洁效果优于MTAD和EDTA组(P <0. 05);组内比较,在温度相同时,冲洗时间60 s组优于30 s组,在冲洗时间相同时,20℃和37℃优于4℃(P <0. 05)。结论:Qmix冲洗液清除根管壁玷污层的效果优于MTAD和EDTA,37℃冲洗60 s效果更好。
        Objective: To observe the root canal smear layer removal efficiency of Qmix,MTAD and EDTA. Methods: 240 isolated front teeth with single root were collected and the root canal preparation was conducted using motorized Pro Taper next. 1% sodium hypochlorite was used as the basic rinse solution. According to the final rinse solution the teeth were divided into 4 groups: Qmix,MTAD and EDTA group( positive control) and saline group( negative control),The teeth in each group was then randomly divided into 6 subgroups according to the rinse temperature and the rinse time( n = 10) respectively,4 ℃ 30 s,4 ℃ 60 s,20 ℃ 30 s,20 ℃ 60 s,37℃ 30 s group and 37 ℃ 60 s groups. SEM was used to observe the root canal smear layer removal effect. Results: Qmix,MTAD and EDTA showed stronger effect of smear layer removal than saline,P < 0. 001,Qmix showed the strongest effect( P < 0. 05). The rinse for 60 s was more effective than that for 30 s at the same temperature. When the rinsing time is constant,the rince at 37 ℃ and 20 ℃was more effective than that at 4 ℃( P < 0. 05). Conclusion: Qmix is more effective than MTAD and EDTA in the canal smear layer removal,at 37 ℃ rinse for 60 s is the most effective.

引文

[1] Sen BH,Wesselink PR,Türkün M. The smear layer:A phenomenon in root canal therapy[J]. Int Endod J,1995,28(3):141-148.
    [2] Shahravan A,Haghdoost AA,Adl A,et al. Effect of smear layer on sealing ability of canal obturation:A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Endod,2007,33(2):96-105.
    [3]后岷红,陈敏,李蕾,等.次酸钠冲洗方式、温度和冲洗时间影响根管玷污层的清除效果[J].中国组织工程研究,2015,19(43):6918-6923.
    [4]武洲,曾煜,陈敏,等. 4种机动镍钛器械根管预备后对牙根抗折性的影响[J].实用口腔医学杂志,2017,33(6):788-791.
    [5] Huang TY,Gulabivala K,Ng YL. A bio-molecular film exvivo model to evaluate the influence of canal dimensions and irrigation variables on the efficacy of irrigation[J]. Int Endod J,2008,41(6):60-71.
    [6] Rossi-Fedele G,Do(gramaci EJ,Guastalli AR,et al. Antagonistic interactions between sodium hypochlorite,chlorhexidine,EDTA,and citric acid[J]. J Endod,2012,38(4):426-431.
    [7]熊梦琳,徐江,马琰,等.镍钛器械在3种不同模式下预备根管后根尖孔表面形态变化[J].口腔医学研究,2017,33(2):183-186.
    [8] Hülsmann M,Rümmelin C,Schfers F. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments:A comparative SEM investigation[J]. J Endod,1997,23(5):301-306.
    [9] Vemuri S,Kolanu SR,Varri S,et al. Effect of different final irrigating solutions on smear layer removal in apical third of root canal:A scanning electron microscope study[J]. J Conserv Dent,2016,19(1):87-90.
    [10] Dai L,Khechen K,Khan S,et al. The effect of QMix,an experimental antibacterial root canal irrigant,on removal of canal wall smear layer and debris[J]. J Endod,2011,37(1):80-84.
    [11] Chandrasekhar V,Amulya V,Rani VS,et al. Evaluation of biocompatibility of a new root canal irrigant Q MixTM2 in 1-an in vivo study[J]. J Conserv Dent,2013,16(1):36-40.
    [12]郭香君,苗晖,李蕾,等.温度和声波振动对玷污层清除效果的比较研究[J].牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志,2014,24(2):101-104.
    [13] Uzunoqlu E,Turker SA,Karahan S. The effect of increased temperatures of QMix and EDTA on the push-out bond strength of an epoxy-resin based sealer[J]. J Clin Diagn Res,2015,9(7):ZC98-101.
    [14]I9ek E,Keskin. The effect of the temperature changes of EDTA and MTAD on the removal of the smear layer:A scanning electron microscopy study[J]. Scanning,2015,37(3):193-196.
    [15]刘颖,苗苗,张昕,等.终末冲洗方案对根管封闭剂与根管壁牙本质粘结强度的影响[J].实用口腔医学杂志,2016,32(1):72-76.
    [16]杨俊,梁广智,范兵. MTAD清除根管玷污层的研究进展[J].国外医学·口腔医学分册,2004,31(5):385-387.
    [17]姜楠,李响,孙淑芬. MTAD在根管冲洗中作用的研究进展[J].海南医学,2016,27(20):3385-3382.
    [18] Wu L,Mu Y,Deng X,et al. Comparison of the effect of four decalcifying agents combined with 60℃3%sodium hypochlorite on smear layer removal[J]. J Endod,2012,38(3):381-384.