不同超聲器械進(jìn)行齦下刮治對(duì)牙根面影響的實(shí)驗(yàn)研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-11-28 17:00
【摘要】：目的：隨著超聲技術(shù)的進(jìn)步和發(fā)展，臨床上出現(xiàn)了多種超聲齦下刮治器，既能更高效地去除菌斑牙石，又能減輕患者不適感。本研究通過磁致伸縮式超聲刮治器、壓電陶瓷式超聲刮治器和Vector超聲系統(tǒng)分別對(duì)有牙石覆蓋的牙根面進(jìn)行處理，記錄刮治時(shí)間，結(jié)合掃描電鏡觀察刮治后牙根表面情況，評(píng)估3種不同超聲器械進(jìn)行齦下刮治的效能以及對(duì)牙根面的影響，為臨床上齦下刮治超聲器械的選擇提供參考。 研究方法：收集因嚴(yán)重牙周病拔除并已完成超聲齦上潔治術(shù)后的離體患牙34顆，對(duì)其近遠(yuǎn)中根面牙石進(jìn)行評(píng)估記錄并分級(jí)，按照設(shè)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)選擇48個(gè)齦下根面，隨機(jī)分為4組：奧丹超聲治療儀組（A組），EMS超聲治療儀組（B組），Vector超聲系統(tǒng)組（C組）和手工對(duì)照組（D組），標(biāo)記根中部5mm×4mm范圍進(jìn)行齦下刮治，直至肉眼見無牙石，探針檢查根面光滑、堅(jiān)硬為止。記錄每個(gè)根面的刮治時(shí)間。在體視顯微鏡和掃描電鏡下觀察刮治后牙根面的情況，拍攝圖像。每組隨機(jī)選取2個(gè)根面掃描電鏡觀察牙根面情況，并將刮治區(qū)域平均分為9等份，選取每等份的中心點(diǎn)在200倍鏡下拍攝圖像，根據(jù)對(duì)根面粗糙度程度分級(jí)記分，進(jìn)行比較研究。各組齦下刮治所消耗的時(shí)間采用完全隨機(jī)設(shè)計(jì)方差分析，各組粗糙程度比較采用完全隨機(jī)設(shè)計(jì)多樣本比較的秩和檢驗(yàn)進(jìn)行分析。 結(jié)果：1.刮治時(shí)間比較：在清除實(shí)驗(yàn)區(qū)域牙石的用時(shí)方面，Vector超聲系統(tǒng)組的用時(shí)最長(zhǎng)（164.75±24.19）秒，顯著長(zhǎng)于奧丹超聲治療儀組（42.17±5.18）秒的用時(shí)，也長(zhǎng)于EMS超聲治療儀組的用時(shí)（55.92±7.56）秒和手工器械對(duì)照組的用時(shí)（68.50±12.26）秒。完全隨機(jī)設(shè)計(jì)方差分析顯示，組間用時(shí)差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（F=196.439，P＜0.001），組間兩兩比較示各組間差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（P＜0.05）。 2.根面粗糙度比較：經(jīng)完全隨機(jī)設(shè)計(jì)秩和檢驗(yàn)，4種不同器械處理過的根面粗糙度差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（H=49.908，P＜0.001）。通過調(diào)整檢驗(yàn)水準(zhǔn)法進(jìn)行組間兩兩比較示：奧丹超聲治療儀組與EMS超聲治療儀組處理后根面粗糙度差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（Z=㧟0.143，P＞0.05），奧丹超聲治療儀組與Vector超聲系統(tǒng)組處理后根面粗糙度差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（Z=㧟4.640，P＜0.001），，EMS超聲治療儀組與Vector超聲系統(tǒng)組處理后根面粗糙度差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（Z=㧟4.646，P＜0.001），Vector超聲系統(tǒng)組與手工對(duì)照組處理后根面粗糙度差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（Z=㧟2.389，P＜0.05）。 3.掃描電鏡觀察：100倍鏡下觀察奧丹超聲治療儀組可見牙根面凹凸不平，部分位點(diǎn)可見玷污層殘留，牙根面可見明顯的劃痕，少量牙骨質(zhì)呈片狀剝脫。EMS超聲治療儀組鏡下可見牙根面不光滑，見不規(guī)則玷污層殘留，牙根面部分位點(diǎn)可見少量劃痕，無明顯牙骨質(zhì)剝脫或鑿孔。Vector超聲系統(tǒng)組處理后牙根面最光滑，可見少量玷污層，牙根面形態(tài)結(jié)果較清晰，未見明顯劃痕，部分位點(diǎn)可見牙骨質(zhì)結(jié)構(gòu)。手工對(duì)照組鏡下見牙根面光滑，見形狀不規(guī)則玷污層殘留，難以區(qū)分牙骨質(zhì)和牙本質(zhì)結(jié)果，無明顯牙骨質(zhì)剝脫。 結(jié)論：1.奧丹超聲器械進(jìn)行齦下刮治的時(shí)間短于EMS壓電陶瓷式超聲器械、Vector超聲系統(tǒng)和傳統(tǒng)手工器械，而Vector超聲系統(tǒng)的用時(shí)最長(zhǎng)，提示奧丹超聲器械齦下刮治的效率最高，Vector超聲系統(tǒng)進(jìn)行齦下刮治效率較低。 2.奧丹超聲器械齦下刮治后的牙根面粗糙不平，劃痕明顯，對(duì)根面組織的損傷最重，EMS超聲器械稍優(yōu)于奧丹超聲器械，Vector超聲系統(tǒng)處理后的牙根面光滑平整，無劃痕，是4組器械中對(duì)牙根面損傷最小的刮治器械。
[Abstract]:Objective: With the progress and development of the ultrasonic technology, a variety of ultrasonic subgingival curettage devices have been developed in clinic, which can remove the dental plaque more efficiently and alleviate the discomfort of the patients. According to the research, the root surface covered by the tartar is treated by a magnetic-induced telescopic ultrasonic wave-scraping device, a piezoelectric ceramic-type ultrasonic wave-scraping device and a Vector ultrasonic system, the scraping time is recorded, and the surface of the root of the root of the root is observed by the scanning electron microscope. The effects of three different ultrasonic devices on the subgingival curettage and the effect on the root surface were evaluated. Methods: 34 teeth were collected for the removal of serious periodontal disease and the ultrasonic subgingival cleaning was completed, and the root surface was evaluated and recorded, and 48 subgingival root surfaces were randomly divided into 4 groups according to the set standard.), the EMS ultrasonic therapeutic equipment group (group B), the Vector ultrasound system group (group C) and the manual control group (group D), the subgingival curettage is carried out in the range of 5mm to 4mm in the middle part of the marker root, Stop. Record the curettage of each root surface and observing the condition of the root surface after the scraping and treatment under the stereomicroscope and the scanning electron microscope, The method comprises the following steps: each group randomly selects two root surface scanning electron microscope to observe the root surface condition, and the scraping region is divided into 9 parts on average, the center point of each part is selected to shoot an image under a 200-fold mirror, and the comparison and research are carried out according to the grading score of the roughness degree of the root surface. The time consumed by the subgingival curettage of each group was studied by a complete random design variance analysis, and the degree of roughness of each group was compared with the rank and the test of the complete random design. in the form of a knot Results: 1. The time of scraping and treatment: The longest (164. 75, 24. 19) seconds in the use of the Vector ultrasound system group in the removal of the dental calculus in the experimental area was significantly longer than that in the treatment group of the Odan (4.17, 5.18) seconds. At the time of use, it was also longer than the use of the EMS ultrasound treatment group (52.92 to 7.56) seconds and when the manual device control group was used (60.50) 12. 2 The analysis of variance showed that the difference between the groups was statistically significant (F = 196.439, P <0.001), and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (P <0. 05). 2. Comparison of root surface roughness: the difference of root surface roughness treated by four different devices is of statistical significance through complete random design rank and test (H = 49. 908, P <0. 001) The difference of the roughness of the root surface after treatment with the group of the Odan ultrasonic treatment instrument and the EMS ultrasonic treatment instrument group was not statistically significant (Z =-0.143, P> The difference of the roughness of the root surface after treatment with the Vector ultrasound system was of statistical significance (Z =-4.640, P <0.001), and the difference of the roughness of the root surface after treatment with the Vector ultrasound system was statistically significant (Z =-4.646, P <0).. 001) The difference of root surface roughness after treatment with the Vector ultrasound system and the manual control group was of statistical significance (Z =? 2.389, P <0. 05). 3. The scanning electron microscope observation: under the 100-fold observation, the surface of the root surface of the Odan ultrasonic therapeutic equipment group is observed to be uneven, the part of the site can be seen to have a stain layer residue, the root surface can be obviously scratched, and a small amount of teeth The quality of the bone is in the form of sheet-like exfoliation. The surface of the root of the root is not smooth under the lens of the EMS ultrasonic therapeutic equipment. See the residue of the irregular stained layer. The site of the root surface can be found with a small amount of scratch and no obvious teeth. The root surface is the most smooth after treatment with the Vector ultrasound system group, and a small amount of defiled layer is visible. The morphological results of the root surface are clear, and no obvious scratch or partial site is found. It can be seen that the root surface is smooth under the manual control group, and it is difficult to distinguish the results of the cementum and dentine, and it is difficult to distinguish the results of the cementum and dentine. obvious cementum Conclusion: 1. The time of subgingival curettage of the 1. Odin ultrasound device is shorter than that of the EMS piezoelectric ceramic ultrasonic device, the Vector ultrasonic system and the traditional hand-operated device, and the longest time of the use of the Vector ultrasound system, the efficiency of the subgingival curettage of the Odan ultrasonic device is the highest, and the Vector ultrasound system is advanced. The treatment efficiency of the subgingival curettage is low. The root surface after the subgingival curettage of the ultrasound device of the Odan ultrasonic device is rough, the scratch is obvious, the damage to the tissue of the root surface is the most, the EMS ultrasonic device is slightly superior to that of the Odan ultrasonic device and the Vector ultrasonic system, The root surface is smooth and flat and has no scratch. It is the right tooth in the 4 sets of devices.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣西醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：R781.4
本文編號(hào)：2363614
[Abstract]:Objective: With the progress and development of the ultrasonic technology, a variety of ultrasonic subgingival curettage devices have been developed in clinic, which can remove the dental plaque more efficiently and alleviate the discomfort of the patients. According to the research, the root surface covered by the tartar is treated by a magnetic-induced telescopic ultrasonic wave-scraping device, a piezoelectric ceramic-type ultrasonic wave-scraping device and a Vector ultrasonic system, the scraping time is recorded, and the surface of the root of the root of the root is observed by the scanning electron microscope. The effects of three different ultrasonic devices on the subgingival curettage and the effect on the root surface were evaluated. Methods: 34 teeth were collected for the removal of serious periodontal disease and the ultrasonic subgingival cleaning was completed, and the root surface was evaluated and recorded, and 48 subgingival root surfaces were randomly divided into 4 groups according to the set standard.), the EMS ultrasonic therapeutic equipment group (group B), the Vector ultrasound system group (group C) and the manual control group (group D), the subgingival curettage is carried out in the range of 5mm to 4mm in the middle part of the marker root, Stop. Record the curettage of each root surface and observing the condition of the root surface after the scraping and treatment under the stereomicroscope and the scanning electron microscope, The method comprises the following steps: each group randomly selects two root surface scanning electron microscope to observe the root surface condition, and the scraping region is divided into 9 parts on average, the center point of each part is selected to shoot an image under a 200-fold mirror, and the comparison and research are carried out according to the grading score of the roughness degree of the root surface. The time consumed by the subgingival curettage of each group was studied by a complete random design variance analysis, and the degree of roughness of each group was compared with the rank and the test of the complete random design. in the form of a knot Results: 1. The time of scraping and treatment: The longest (164. 75, 24. 19) seconds in the use of the Vector ultrasound system group in the removal of the dental calculus in the experimental area was significantly longer than that in the treatment group of the Odan (4.17, 5.18) seconds. At the time of use, it was also longer than the use of the EMS ultrasound treatment group (52.92 to 7.56) seconds and when the manual device control group was used (60.50) 12. 2 The analysis of variance showed that the difference between the groups was statistically significant (F = 196.439, P <0.001), and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (P <0. 05). 2. Comparison of root surface roughness: the difference of root surface roughness treated by four different devices is of statistical significance through complete random design rank and test (H = 49. 908, P <0. 001) The difference of the roughness of the root surface after treatment with the group of the Odan ultrasonic treatment instrument and the EMS ultrasonic treatment instrument group was not statistically significant (Z =-0.143, P> The difference of the roughness of the root surface after treatment with the Vector ultrasound system was of statistical significance (Z =-4.640, P <0.001), and the difference of the roughness of the root surface after treatment with the Vector ultrasound system was statistically significant (Z =-4.646, P <0).. 001) The difference of root surface roughness after treatment with the Vector ultrasound system and the manual control group was of statistical significance (Z =? 2.389, P <0. 05). 3. The scanning electron microscope observation: under the 100-fold observation, the surface of the root surface of the Odan ultrasonic therapeutic equipment group is observed to be uneven, the part of the site can be seen to have a stain layer residue, the root surface can be obviously scratched, and a small amount of teeth The quality of the bone is in the form of sheet-like exfoliation. The surface of the root of the root is not smooth under the lens of the EMS ultrasonic therapeutic equipment. See the residue of the irregular stained layer. The site of the root surface can be found with a small amount of scratch and no obvious teeth. The root surface is the most smooth after treatment with the Vector ultrasound system group, and a small amount of defiled layer is visible. The morphological results of the root surface are clear, and no obvious scratch or partial site is found. It can be seen that the root surface is smooth under the manual control group, and it is difficult to distinguish the results of the cementum and dentine, and it is difficult to distinguish the results of the cementum and dentine. obvious cementum Conclusion: 1. The time of subgingival curettage of the 1. Odin ultrasound device is shorter than that of the EMS piezoelectric ceramic ultrasonic device, the Vector ultrasonic system and the traditional hand-operated device, and the longest time of the use of the Vector ultrasound system, the efficiency of the subgingival curettage of the Odan ultrasonic device is the highest, and the Vector ultrasound system is advanced. The treatment efficiency of the subgingival curettage is low. The root surface after the subgingival curettage of the ultrasound device of the Odan ultrasonic device is rough, the scratch is obvious, the damage to the tissue of the root surface is the most, the EMS ultrasonic device is slightly superior to that of the Odan ultrasonic device and the Vector ultrasonic system, The root surface is smooth and flat and has no scratch. It is the right tooth in the 4 sets of devices.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣西醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：R781.4
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條
1 寧楊;付云;周玉竹;;Vector和P5治療儀行齦下刮治術(shù)對(duì)療效及牙科畏懼水平的影響[J];廣東牙病防治;2009年03期
2 筒永平;;慢性牙周炎超聲齦下潔治和手工齦下刮治的療效比較[J];中國臨床醫(yī)學(xué);2010年04期
3 束蓉;宋忠臣;葛琳華;顧晶晶;程嵐;謝玉峰;李超倫;劉曉峰;劉大力;;基礎(chǔ)治療對(duì)慢性牙周炎臨床療效和齦下牙周致病菌的影響[J];上�？谇会t(yī)學(xué);2010年03期
4 谷文惠,楊冬茹,董福生,賈欣欣,趙潔,李淑娟;超聲齦下刮治對(duì)根面影響的掃描電鏡研究[J];現(xiàn)代口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2004年03期
5 周爽英;曹婕;孟煥新;;Vector超聲系統(tǒng)對(duì)牙周炎維護(hù)期患者的療效觀察和疼痛感受評(píng)價(jià)[J];現(xiàn)代口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2010年02期
6 葛少華,楊丕山,趙寧,戚向敏,孫欽峰;牙周非手術(shù)治療對(duì)牙髓和根面牙本質(zhì)敏感的影響[J];牙體牙髓牙周病學(xué)雜志;2004年04期
7 陳美華;尹元正;;齦下超聲器械的現(xiàn)狀和進(jìn)展[J];牙體牙髓牙周病學(xué)雜志;2007年10期
8 丁一,胡琳,劉國良;超聲和手用器械齦下潔治后牙根面的掃描電鏡觀察[J];牙體牙髓牙周病學(xué)雜志;1997年01期
9 徐莉,曹采方,應(yīng)平,李玉敏;多根牙齦下超聲刮治及手工刮治療效觀察[J];中華口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;1997年06期
本文編號(hào)：2363614
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/yixuelunwen/kouq/2363614.html
最近更新
教材專著
