蘇曉東
[摘要] 目的 分析自酸蝕粘接劑對(duì)活髓基牙的保護(hù)治療效果。方法 方便選擇2015年8月—2017年2月收治的126例采用金屬烤瓷固定橋修復(fù)治療的患者并隨機(jī)分組。對(duì)照組未采取任何保護(hù)措施,保護(hù)組在備牙后立刻采用自酸蝕粘接劑對(duì)活髓基牙進(jìn)行保護(hù)。比較兩組磨牙和前磨牙治療前VAS評(píng)分、粘冠前VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分。粘冠前和粘冠后4周生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分。結(jié)果 兩組患者磨牙和前磨牙粘冠前VAS評(píng)分均最高,在粘冠后VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分均顯著降低,和粘冠前VAS評(píng)分對(duì)比差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),其中,對(duì)照組磨牙治療前、粘冠前、粘冠后、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分分別是(0.13±0.15)分、(3.67±2.12)分、(0.91±0.23)分、(0.24±0.11)分,保護(hù)組分別是(0.13±0.14)分、(3.67±2.11)分、(0.91±0.24)分、(0.25±0.11)分。對(duì)照組前磨牙治療前、粘冠前、粘冠后、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分分別是(0.14±0.23)分、(4.34±0.23)分、(0.83±0.33)分、(0.36±0.12)分,保護(hù)組分別是(0.13±0.24)分、(4.34±0.22)分、(0.81±0.33)分、(0.37±0.15)分。粘冠前兩組生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分相近(P>0.05);粘冠后4周保護(hù)組生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分中軀體功能、情感功能、社會(huì)功能分別為(84.46±13.11)分、(86.91±14.56)分、(93.36±18.22)分,優(yōu)于對(duì)照組(63.10±9.65)分、(72.17±10.98)分、(80.42±13.11)分,(t=5.244、8.322、7.134,P<0.05)。結(jié)論 自酸蝕粘接劑對(duì)活髓基牙并無明顯保護(hù)作用,無論有無使用自酸蝕粘接劑,只要冠橋修復(fù)體具有較高的質(zhì)量,可顯著降低基牙備牙后敏感癥狀,減輕患者疼痛感。因此,為有效減少活髓基術(shù)后敏感性和疼痛度,需選擇邊緣密合度高的修復(fù)體,并做好粘固工作。
[關(guān)鍵詞] 自酸蝕粘接劑;活髓基牙保護(hù);治療效果
[中圖分類號(hào)] R5 [文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼] A [文章編號(hào)] 1674-0742(2017)12(c)-0082-03
[Abstract] Objective This paper tries to analyze the self etching adhesive on the vital pulp teeth protection treatment. Methods 126 cases using the PFM fixed bridge restoration treatment from August 2015 to February 2017 were convenient selected and randomly grouped. The control group did not take any protective measures, the protective group in the tooth after the preparation immediately by the protection of vital abutment self etching adhesive. Comparison of two groups of molars and premolars before treatment VAS score, VAS score before sticky sticky crown, crown after the VAS score, VAS score after 4 weeks of stick crowns was implemented. Quality of life score of 4 weeks before and after the crown stick were compared. Results The VAS scores of the two groups were highest before and after the crown sticking. The VAS score of the sticking crown and the VAS score of the 4th week after sticking crown were significantly lower than those before the sticking crown(P<0.05). The VAS scores of the control group before treatment, before sticking the crown, after sticking the crown, and 4 weeks after sticking the crown were (0.13±0.15)points, (3.67±2.12)points, (0.91±0.23)points and (0.24±0.11)points, respectively, while those in the protection group were (0.13±0.14)points, (3.67±2.11)points, (0.91±0.24)points, (0.25±0.11)points. The VAS scores in the control group before premolar treatment, before sticking the crown, after sticking the crown, 4 weeks after sticking crown were (0.14±0.23)points, (4.34±0.23)points, (0.83±0.33)points and (0.36±0.12)points, respectively, and those in the protection group were (0.13±0.24)points and (4.34±0.22)points, (0.81±0.33)points, (0.37±0.15)points. The quality of life scores of the two groups before sticking crown were similar(P>0.05); the body function, emotional function and social function in the quality of life protection group were(84.46±13.11)points, (86.91±14.56)points and (93.36±18.22)points respectively, in the control group, (63.10±9.65)points, (72.17±10.98)points and(80.42±13.11)points, respectively(t=5.244, 8.322, 7.134, P<0.05). Conclusion Self-etching adhesives have no significant protective effect on live pulp abutments, with or without the use of self-etching adhesives, as long as the crown bridge restoration has a high quality, which can significantly reduce the sensitive symptoms of abutment preparation teeth, reduce pain in patients. Therefore, in order to effectively reduce the sensitivity and pain of post-marrow biopsy, it is necessary to choose a prosthesis with high edge adhesion and do a good job of cementing.endprint
[Key words] Self-etching adhesive; Vital pulp abutment protection; Treatment effect
口腔固定修復(fù)后,患者活髓基牙通??沙霈F(xiàn)牙髓炎和牙本質(zhì)敏感癥狀,增加患者痛苦,需采取有效的方法進(jìn)行活髓基牙的保護(hù),以減輕患者疼痛,提高其生活質(zhì)量[1]。該研究方便選擇2015年8月—2017年2月收治的126例采用金屬烤瓷固定橋修復(fù)治療的患者并隨機(jī)分組,分析了自酸蝕粘接劑對(duì)活髓基牙的保護(hù)治療效果,現(xiàn)報(bào)道如下。
1 資料與方法
1.1 一般資料
方便選擇該院收治的126例采用金屬烤瓷固定橋修復(fù)治療的患者并隨機(jī)分組。納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):均為磨牙和前磨牙,基牙牙髓活力均正常;該研究所有患者知情同意該次研究。該研究通過倫理委員會(huì)的批準(zhǔn),患者知情同意。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①近3個(gè)月接受脫敏治療、牙周治療者;②充填體深度超過牙本質(zhì)中層;③未知情同意該次研究。保護(hù)組男33例,女30例;年齡21~67歲,年齡(39.34±2.12)歲。對(duì)照組男32例,女31例;年齡22~67歲,年齡(39.14±2.66)歲。兩組一般資料相似,差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。
1.2 方法
對(duì)照組未采取任何保護(hù)措施,保護(hù)組在備牙后立刻采用自酸蝕粘接劑對(duì)活髓基牙進(jìn)行保護(hù),常規(guī)制取印模,采用超硬石膏模型灌注,制作暫時(shí)冠。永久粘接劑采用3M ESPE,在粘接的過程為避免過分干燥對(duì)牙髓造成刺激,用75%酒精消毒之后用棉球擦干。采用冷空氣吹噴檢測(cè)方法,在室溫20℃的情況下用三用槍和牙頰側(cè)頸1/3處垂直,距離牙面1 cm左右的地方給予吹氣1 s,鄰牙在檢查過程需用手指、棉卷隔開,分別在備牙之前、粘冠前、粘冠后、粘冠后1個(gè)月檢查 [2]。
1.3 觀察指標(biāo)
比較兩組磨牙和前磨牙治療前VAS評(píng)分、粘冠前VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分。粘冠前和粘冠后4周生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分。
VAS評(píng)分0~10分,0分無痛,10分為劇烈疼痛,分?jǐn)?shù)越高則疼痛越劇烈。生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分采用SF-36量表(生活質(zhì)量量表,滿分100分,分?jǐn)?shù)越高生活質(zhì)量越高)進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià),評(píng)估其軀體功能、情感功能、社會(huì)功能,每一項(xiàng)0~100分,分?jǐn)?shù)越高則生活質(zhì)量越高[3]。
1.4 統(tǒng)計(jì)方法
數(shù)據(jù)采用SPSS 22.0統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)軟件分析,計(jì)量資料、計(jì)數(shù)資料分別用t檢驗(yàn)和χ2檢驗(yàn),并分別用(x±s)、[n(%)]表示,P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2 結(jié)果
2.1 兩組比較兩組磨牙和前磨牙治療前VAS評(píng)分、粘冠前VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分比較
兩組患者磨牙和前磨牙粘冠前VAS評(píng)分均最高,在粘冠后VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分均顯著降低,和粘冠前VAS評(píng)分對(duì)比差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),其中,對(duì)照組磨牙治療前、粘冠前、粘冠后、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分分別是(0.13±0.15)分、(3.67±2.12)分、(0.91±0.23)分、(0.24±0.11)分,保護(hù)組分別是(0.13±0.14)分、(3.67±2.11)分、(0.91±0.24)分、(0.25±0.11)分。對(duì)照組前磨牙治療前、粘冠前、粘冠后、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分分別是(0.14±0.23)分、(4.34±0.23)分、(0.83±0.33)分、(0.36±0.12)分,保護(hù)組分別是(0.13±0.24)分、(4.34±0.22)分、(0.81±0.33)分、(0.37±0.15)分。組間同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)進(jìn)行對(duì)比,兩組患者磨牙和前磨牙VAS評(píng)分差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。如表1。
2.2 粘冠前后生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分相比較
粘冠前兩組生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分相近(P>0.05);粘冠后4周保護(hù)組生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分中軀體功能、情感功能、社會(huì)功能分別為(84.46±13.11)分、(86.91±14.56)分、(93.36±18.22)分,優(yōu)于對(duì)照組(63.10±9.65)分、(72.17±10.98)分、(80.42±13.11)分(P<0.05)。見表2。
3 討論
活髓牙預(yù)備后患者可出現(xiàn)牙本質(zhì)暴露,導(dǎo)致牙本質(zhì)小管開放等,且在進(jìn)食等外界刺激之下,牙本質(zhì)小管中液體流動(dòng)并可傳導(dǎo)至牙髓,導(dǎo)致牙髓神經(jīng)興奮并產(chǎn)生痛覺,出現(xiàn)牙本質(zhì)過敏?;诖?,在備牙后立刻采用牙本質(zhì)脫敏藥物對(duì)表面進(jìn)行處理,封閉暴露的牙本質(zhì)小管,阻止小管液體流動(dòng),降低牙本質(zhì)小管通透性,預(yù)防細(xì)菌或代謝產(chǎn)物從小管進(jìn)入牙髓[4-5]。
該研究中,保護(hù)組在備牙后立刻采用自酸蝕粘接劑對(duì)活髓基牙進(jìn)行保護(hù)。自酸蝕粘接劑可在牙本質(zhì)表面形成混合層,并形成牙本質(zhì)小管樹脂突結(jié)構(gòu),緊密封閉牙本質(zhì)小管。另外,樹脂改性玻璃離子水門汀作為粘接劑,粘結(jié)效果好,牢固性強(qiáng),經(jīng)干預(yù),結(jié)果顯示,兩組患者磨牙和前磨牙粘冠前VAS評(píng)分均最高,在粘冠后VAS評(píng)分、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分均顯著降低,和粘冠前VAS評(píng)分對(duì)比差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),其中,對(duì)照組磨牙治療前、粘冠前、粘冠后、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分分別是(0.13±0.15)分、(3.67±2.12)分、(0.91±0.23)分、(0.24±0.11)分,保護(hù)組分別是(0.13±0.14)分、(3.67±2.11)分、(0.91±0.24)分、(0.25±0.11)分。對(duì)照組前磨牙治療前、粘冠前、粘冠后、粘冠后4周VAS評(píng)分分別是(0.14±0.23)分、(4.34±0.23)分、(0.83±0.33)分、(0.36±0.12)分,保護(hù)組分別是(0.13±0.24)分、(4.34±0.22)分、(0.81±0.33)分、(0.37±0.15)分。粘冠前兩組生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分相近(P>0.05);粘冠后4周保護(hù)組生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分中軀體功能、情感功能、社會(huì)功能分別為(84.46±13.11)分、(86.91±14.56)分、(93.36±18.22)分,優(yōu)于對(duì)照組(63.10±9.65)分、(72.17±10.98)分、(80.42±13.11)分,(t=5.244、8.322、7.134,P<0.05)。endprint
從結(jié)果可見,采用自酸蝕粘接劑并無法顯著減輕術(shù)后牙本質(zhì)敏感癥狀,這可能是因?yàn)椋孩賯溲乐?,牙本質(zhì)表面存在較厚玷污層,可影響自酸蝕粘接劑滲入以及影響和牙本質(zhì)之間的粘連效果[6-7]。②牙本質(zhì)小管中被牙本質(zhì)液充滿,若牙骨質(zhì)或牙釉質(zhì)封閉小管則無液體流動(dòng),經(jīng)備牙后牙本質(zhì)小管開放,牙本質(zhì)液可緩慢往外流動(dòng)。且由于近髓處牙本質(zhì)小管管徑粗、數(shù)量多,小管中液體滲出多,不容易形成樹脂突發(fā)揮封閉作用。③在暫時(shí)冠采用臨時(shí)粘固劑粘固以及去除過程,修復(fù)體試戴過程均可導(dǎo)致自酸蝕粘接劑脫落而導(dǎo)致封閉牙本質(zhì)小管再次開放而對(duì)保護(hù)治療效果造成影響。因此,選擇在試戴冠過程不容易出現(xiàn)脫落的牙本質(zhì)粘接劑以及可和近髓處牙本質(zhì)牢固粘接的粘接劑,是保護(hù)活髓基牙的關(guān)鍵[8-10]。吳萍[10]的研究表明自酸蝕粘接劑對(duì)牙本質(zhì)敏感癥具有良好的治療效果,在即刻、3個(gè)月的脫敏效果均優(yōu)于氟化鈉甘油的效果。
綜上所述,自酸蝕粘接劑對(duì)活髓基牙并無明顯保護(hù)作用,無論有無使用自酸蝕粘接劑,只要冠橋修復(fù)體具有較高的質(zhì)量,可顯著降低基牙備牙后敏感癥狀,減輕患者疼痛感。因此,為有效減少活髓基術(shù)后敏感性和疼痛度,需選擇邊緣密合度高的修復(fù)體,并做好粘固工作。
[參考文獻(xiàn)]
[1] 張路,袁重陽(yáng),田福聰,等.自酸蝕粘接劑系統(tǒng)對(duì)變形鏈球菌的抑制作用[J].北京大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào):醫(yī)學(xué)版,2016,48(1):57-62.
[2] 李菊,王璐,李鵬,等.滲透樹脂與流體樹脂封閉牙本質(zhì)小管的實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[J].實(shí)用口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志,2016,32(3):336-340.
[3] Nocca Giuseppina,Iori Andrea,Rossini Carlo,et al.Effects of barriers on chemical and biological properties of two dual resin cements[J].European journal of oral sciences,2015,123(3):208-214.
[4] Soares Diana Gabriela,Sacono Nancy Tomoko,Ribeiro Ana Paula Dias,et al.Responses of Dental Pulp Cells to a Less Invasive Bleaching Technique Applied to Adhesively Restored Teeth[J].The journal of adhesive dentistry,2015,17(2):155-161.
[5] 王玉棟,周銀鳳,賀凌飛,等.超級(jí)粘接劑在臨床應(yīng)用上的研究[J].國(guó)際醫(yī)藥衛(wèi)生導(dǎo)報(bào),2016,22(6):753-755.
[6] 鄧東來,楊宏業(yè),郭景梅,等.兩種外源性酶對(duì)牙本質(zhì)粘接界面的老化作用初探[J].中華口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志,2016,51(4):230-234.
[7] Aziz TM,Anwar MN,El-Askary FS,et al.Push-out bond strength of fiber posts to root canal dentin using a one-step self-etching adhesive: the effect of solvent removal and light-curing methods.[J].The journal of adhesive dentistry,2014,16(1):79-86.
[8] 趙玉水,儀虹,孫英超,等.預(yù)酸蝕對(duì)不同粘接劑修復(fù)Ⅴ類洞微滲漏影響的體外研究[J].中國(guó)醫(yī)刊,2016,51(12):66-68.
[9] KYOUNG PARK,朱梓園,黃慧,等.2種自制牙本質(zhì)粘接劑的微拉伸粘接強(qiáng)度和耐久性能的實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[J].口腔材料器械雜志,2016,25(3):144-149.
[10] 吳萍.自酸蝕粘接劑治療牙本質(zhì)過敏的療效觀察[J].甘肅醫(yī)藥,2016,35(2):132-133.
(收稿日期:2017-09-22)endprint