TheraCal LC和Dycal两种盖髓剂用于乳牙和恒牙直接盖髓的疗效比较

目的 比较TheraCal LC和Dycal两种盖髓剂用于乳、恒牙直接盖髓术的临床疗效。方法 选择深龋意外露髓的乳牙180颗和恒牙243颗做直接盖髓术，乳、恒牙均按单双数就诊顺序采用半随机方法分为两组，乳牙TheraCal LC组81例患者（90颗牙）；乳牙Dycal组76例患者（90颗牙）。恒牙TheraCal LC组102例患者（122颗牙）；恒牙Dycal组109例患者（121颗牙）。术后12个月，比较两种材料的治疗成功率。结果 治疗12个月后，恒牙TheraCal LC组成功率为95.1%，恒牙Dycal组成功率为93.3%，两组之间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。乳牙TheraCal LC组成功率为87.7%，乳牙Dycal组成功率为46.9%，两组之间有显著差异（P<0.05）。结论 TheraCal LC盖髓剂更适合乳、恒牙的盖髓剂，乳牙的优势可能更为明显。

A comparison of the clinical effect between TheraCal LC and Dycal in direct pulp capping of primary and permanent teeth

Objective To compare the clinical effect between TheraCal LC and Dycal in direct pulp capping of primary and permanent teeth. Methods 180 primary teeth, 243 permanent teeth in this study were collected from the patients whose teeth with accidentally exposed pulps. They were quasi-randomly divided into two groups. 81 patients (90 primary teeth) were treated with TheraCal LC pulp capping and 76 patients (90 primary teeth) with Dycal for pulp capping. 102 patients (122 permanent teeth) were treated with TheraCal LC pulp capping and 109 patients (121) permanent teeth were treated with Dycal for pulp capping. After 12 months, the teeth were assessed clinically to evaluate clinical effect. Results After twelve months, there was no statistically significant difference in the clinical effect between the two groups (P>0.05). TheraCal LC was better than Dycal in direct pulp capping of primary teeth (P<0.05). Conclusion TheraCal LC is more suitable as a direct pulp-capping, particularly in primary teeth, compared to Dycal.