Abstract：Objective: To explore the long-term and long-term effects of traditional metal piles and glass fiber piles in the repair of oral roots. Methods: 94 patients with oral residual root disease admitted to our hospital from January 2016 to July 2018 were enrolled. The patients were divided into two groups according to the random number table method, 47 cases each. The study group (58 teeth) used glass fiber piles for residual root repair, while the control group (56 teeth) used metal piles.The effects of the mid-term (12 months after repair), long-term (24 months after repair) and the health index of the teeth at different times [sulcular bleeding index (SBI), gingival index (GI) ] were compared. Results: At 12 months after repair, the aesthetic effect, prosthetic strength, comfort, and chewing function scores of the study group were higher than those of the control group (P<0.05). The alkaline phosphatase (AKP) level in the control group was significantly higher than that before the repair. High (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the AKP level between the study group and the pre-repair (P>0.05).24 months after the repair, the repair effect of the study group (completed restoration, color matching, edge fit) was better than the control group, and the success rate of repair (94.83%) was higher than that of the control group (78.57%). The difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). The incidence of post-core fracture, root fracture, gingivitis, nucleus detachment or loosening, and gingival margin staining in the study group were lower than those in the control group (P<0.05).Repeated measures analysis of variance showed that the interactions between GI and SBI at the time point and group were significant (P<0.05). At 12 months and 24 months after repair, the GI and SBI of the study group were significantly lower. In the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion: Traditional metal piles and glass fiber piles have certain effects on the repair of oral roots. However, the long-term repair effect of glass fiber piles is better than that of traditional metal piles, which is more conducive to improving the periodontal health index and improving the success rate of repair.
周允芝, 唐旭炎, 李全利, 刘世明. 传统金属桩玻璃纤维桩在口腔残根修复中的中远期疗效对比分析[J]. 河北医学, 2020, 26(3): 450-454.
ZHOU Yunzhi, TANG Xuyan, LIU Shiming, et al. Comparative Analysis of Mid-and Long-term Effects of Traditional Metal Piles and Fiberglass Piles in the Repair of Oral Roots. HeBei Med, 2020, 26(3): 450-454.
[1] Kim J, Dhital S, Zhivago P, et al. Viscoelastic finite element analysis of residual stresses in porcelain-veneered zirconia dental crowns.[J]. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, 2018, 82(1):202~209. [2] 李树朝.玻璃纤维桩树脂核和金属铸造桩核在上颌前牙残根残冠修复中的临床疗效对比[J].现代口腔医学杂志,2017,31(3):58~60. [3] 刘静,李娜.纤维桩加全瓷冠在口腔修复中应用的疗效分析[J].河北医药,2019,41(1):97~103. [4] 解昱,罗冬青,何春环.不同桩核系统修复离体牙根微裂纹比较研究[J].北京口腔医学,2017,25(4):190~192. [5] 廖树芬.玻璃纤维桩与铸造金属桩作用于牙体缺损修复疗效的对比研究[J].牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志,2017,27(12):725~727. [6] 申林,汪婷婷,于淑玲,等.玻璃纤维桩经不同表面处理修复牙体缺损的临床效果[J].中国组织工程研究,2018,22(22):47~52. [7] Sundeep D, Kumar T V, Rao P S S, et al. Green synthesis and characterization of Ag nanoparticles from mangifera indica, leaves for dental restoration and antibacterial applications[J]. Progress in Biomaterials, 2017, 6(1~2):1~10. [8] 刘建,张忠杰.两种口腔纤维桩修复残根残冠的临床效果及对咀嚼功能的影响[J].河北医学,2015,21(9):1452~1455. [9] 吴媛媛.玻璃纤维桩联合BisCem树脂水门汀对残根残冠修复患者PGE-2、IL-1β水平的影响[J].中国医药导报,2018,15(21):108~111. [10] 印奇志.纤维桩核冠和铸造金属桩核冠在后牙牙体大面积缺损修复中的应用[J].安徽医药,2017,21(1):91~93.
2020, Vol. 26 
冀公网安备13080202000677号