两种根管修复治疗后牙牙体缺损的疗效比较

 目的 对比两种方法修复根管(全冠修复根管、高嵌体修复根管)用于后牙牙体缺损患者临床治疗的效果及预后状况。方法 选取2017-05至2019-05医院口腔科收治的后牙牙体缺损患者80例,按治疗方法分为两组,每组40例;A组行高嵌体修复根管治疗,B组行全冠修复根管治疗,分析患者缺牙修复效果、满意度、口腔健康状况改善情况等。结果 两组修复效果优良率分别为92.50%、95.00%,差异无统计学意义;B组满意度评分为(96.82±4.37)分,明显高于A组的(80.62±5.35)分,差异有统计学意义(t=14.362,P<0.05); B组治疗后修复体完整、与邻牙吻合、牙齿美观、咀嚼功能恢复患者构成比,治疗后口腔健康影响程度量表(oralhealthim pactprofile,OHIP-14)中各项评分,均明显优于A组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 全冠、高嵌体修复根管均可获得良好修复效果,但高嵌体修复根管对改善口腔健康状况及预后效果更好。

Two methods of root canal repair for posterior tooth defects and the effect on prognosis

Objective To compare the clinical effect and prognosis of two methods of root canal restoration (crown restoration and high inlay restoration) for posterior tooth defects.Methods The 80 patients with posterior tooth defects who were admitted to our dental department between May 2017 and May 2019 were divided into two groups: group A (40 cases) that was treated with high inlay restoration,and group B (40 cases) that received full crown and root canal therapy.The restoration effect, levels of satisfaction and oral health status of the patients were observed.Results The excellent and good rates of the two groups were 92.50% and 95.00% respectively, but there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups.The score of satisfaction was significantly higher in group B (96.8±24.37) than in group A (80.62±5.35)(t=14.362,P<0.05).In group B, the percentages of patients with complete restoration, harmony with the adjacent tooth, good-looking teeth, and good masticatory function were 97.50%, 95.00%, 97.50% and 95.00%, respectively, which were significantly higher than in group A, so were oral health impact profile and OHIP-14 scores (P<0.05).Conclusions Both full crown restoration and high inlay restoration can be used in the treatment of posterior tooth defects,but the latter approach is more conductive to oral health and prognosis.