賈冬萍 王秀梅 劉亭亭
摘要:根管治療術是牙髓病和根尖周病首選的、最有效的治療方法,根管的消毒、擴大成形以及根尖區(qū)的嚴密封閉是其重要的操作步驟,徹底清除根管內感染源并防止根管再感染是其基礎和目標。根尖微滲漏是根管治療術后根管因再感染而出現(xiàn)根尖周炎癥的危險因素,是根管治療失敗的主要原因。根尖微滲漏的產(chǎn)生是多個因素協(xié)同作用的結果,研究根管治療過程中根尖微滲漏的影響因素,為降低和防止根尖微滲漏的發(fā)生提供指導,對提高根管治療成功率具有重要作用。本文就根管治療過程中根尖微滲漏影響因素的研究進展作一綜述。
關鍵詞:根尖微滲漏;根管預備;根管充填
中圖分類號:R781.05? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?文獻標識碼:A? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.14.012
文章編號:1006-1959(2019)14-0032-04
Abstract:Root canal therapy is the most effective and effective treatment for endodontic diseases and periapical diseases. The disinfection, enlargement of the root canal and strict sealing of the apical area are important steps to completely remove the root canal. Infecting the source and preventing reinfection of the root canal is its foundation and goal. The apical microleakage is a risk factor for periapical inflammation in the root canal due to reinfection after root canal treatment, and is the main cause of failure of root canal treatment. The occurrence of apical microleakage is the result of synergistic effects of multiple factors. Studying the influencing factors of apical microleakage during root canal treatment provides guidance for reducing and preventing the occurrence of apical microleakage, and improving the success of root canal treatment. The rate plays an important role. This article reviews the research progress of factors affecting root tip microleakage during root canal treatment.
Key words:Apical microleakage;Root canal preparation;Root canal filling
根管治療術是牙髓病和根尖周病最完善、最有效的治療方法,它強調根管系統(tǒng)的預備、消毒和嚴密的三維根管充填。臨床根管治療成功率約為70%~90%,63%的根管治療失敗與根尖微滲漏有關[1]。由于根尖封閉不良,細菌、口腔微生物及其代謝產(chǎn)物等刺激因素可再次進入根管導致一系列不良后果。根尖微滲漏的產(chǎn)生與根尖微滲漏與根管預備器械、根管充填糊劑、根管充填技術等多個因素有關[2]。本文就根管治療過程中根尖微滲漏影響因素的研究進展作一綜述。
1根管預備對根尖微滲漏的影響
1.1根管偏移? 臨床上進行根管預備時會不可避免的發(fā)生根管偏移,尤其是對細小彎曲根管的預備更容易出現(xiàn)根管偏移,影響根管治療的遠期療效[3]。發(fā)生偏移的根管,根尖部的凸壁容易殘留細菌和感染的牙髓,且根尖狹窄會向冠方移位,降低根尖區(qū)封閉的嚴密程度,加大根尖微滲漏[4]。鎳鈦器械是現(xiàn)代根管預備的主流器械,每個鎳鈦系統(tǒng)的彈性性能和運動模式不同,根管預備過程中對根管壁產(chǎn)生的影響也會存在差異。根管預備器械的鋼性及錐度越大,根管偏移的發(fā)生率也越大,旋轉預備比提拉式預備產(chǎn)生根尖偏移的風險更大[5]。Pro Taper Next連續(xù)旋轉式運動鎳鈦器械對根管的中心定位能力好,根管偏移量小于Reciproc往復式運動鎳鈦器械,根尖微滲漏的發(fā)生率也低于Reciproc[6]。
1.2牙本質裂紋? 機用鎳鈦器械預備根管時,其成形能力好,切割效率高,但預備根管過程中應力集中在根管內壁,不可避免的會導致牙本質產(chǎn)生細小的裂紋[7]。細菌、微生物及其代謝產(chǎn)物聚集在牙本質裂紋處,導致根尖微滲漏的發(fā)生[8]。剛性越強、錐度越大的根管預備器械,預備過程中對根管壁產(chǎn)生的應力越大,根管壁的牙本質產(chǎn)生裂紋的概率也越大[9]。不同根管預備器械會對根尖孔表面產(chǎn)生不同程度的細小裂紋,隨著時間的推移形成根尖微滲漏,影響根管治療的成功率。Pro Taper Next、Wave One Gold、M3三種機用鎳鈦器械材質柔韌性強、旋入效應低,相比Pro Taper Universal可明顯減少牙本質裂紋發(fā)生[10]。X+File與 Pro Taper Next 產(chǎn)生的完全裂紋和不完全裂紋較Pro Taper Universal少,這與鎳鈦器械的尖端橫截面形態(tài)、運動模式以及中心定位能力有關[11]。牙本質裂紋在復雜咬合應力作用下可能會造成牙根的縱裂,最終導致根管治療術失敗[12]。
1.3器械分離? 根管彎曲度大、牙髓鈣化、操作不當?shù)仍蚨伎蓪е赂茴A備過程中器械分離的發(fā)生。機用鎳鈦銼是臨床上廣泛應用的根管預備器械,Wang? NN等[13]指出鎳鈦器械預備根管過程中發(fā)生器械分離的概率為0.7%~7.4%,高于傳統(tǒng)不銹鋼器械。折斷于根管內的器械內不僅會阻礙感染物質及細菌的清除,器械的溝槽也會聚集玷污層,加大了根尖微滲漏[14]。分離器械的斷端越靠近根尖區(qū)取出越困難。位于根尖區(qū)較短的折斷器械,一般都無法到達工作長度,取出困難又容易被推出根尖孔,不利于后續(xù)操作的進行,影響根管治療的遠期療效及預后[15]。
1.4玷污層? 根管預備過程中會產(chǎn)生牙本質碎屑,這些牙本質碎屑混合根管內的細菌、壞死組織等形成玷污層黏在根管內壁上,可深達牙本質小管40 μm[16]。玷污層不僅會阻礙根尖封閉劑的抗菌成分向牙本質小管的滲入,也會妨礙根管充填材料與根管內壁的緊密貼合,使根尖微滲漏增加[17]。因此,根管治療過程中對玷污層的清理能有效降低根微滲漏的發(fā)生率。去除玷污層的方法有化學法、超聲法、激光法,根管內壁有玷污層的根尖微滲漏深度遠大于根管內壁去除掉玷污層的根尖微滲漏深度。有研究發(fā)現(xiàn)[18],玷污層的去除能使更多的牙本質小管開放,從而增加了根管充填材料與根管內壁的適應性,減少根尖微滲漏。
2根管沖洗對根尖微滲漏的影響
理想的根管沖洗劑應該具有抗菌、潤滑、去除玷污層以及生物安全性等特點。臨床常用的沖洗劑包括次氯酸鈉(NaClO)、氯己定(CHX)、乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)等。CHX能使細胞壁的通透性提高,從而獲得穩(wěn)定且持久的抗菌效果,其生物安全性也較好,沖洗根管后對健康的牙本質沒有影響,不會加大根尖微滲漏現(xiàn)象[19]。NaClO具有較強的抑菌活性,且能溶解玷污層中的有機成分,常用的濃度為1.00%~5.25%,濃度過高會影響牙本質的理化性能,但是,NaClO不能用作終末沖洗溶液,因為NaClO不利于樹脂的聚合,會降低牙本質的粘接強度,從而會增大根尖微滲漏[20]。EDTA是一種金屬螯合劑,能夠有效去除玷污層的無機成分,增加牙本質小管的開放數(shù)量,從而增強了封閉劑和牙本質之間的嵌合,減小根尖微滲漏的發(fā)生[21]。組合成分(QMix)是一種新型根管沖洗溶液,其表面活性成分不僅能夠減低沖洗溶液的表面張力,還能增加根管壁的濕潤性,增強牙本質的粘結強度,減小根尖微滲漏[22]。先用NaClO再用17%EDTA交替沖洗根管,然后用生理鹽水清除NaClO,最后以QMix終末沖洗根管,能夠最大程度的清除根管內的細菌、微生物、內毒素以及玷污層等,顯著提高根管沖洗的有效量,增強牙本質的粘結強度,降低根尖微滲漏的發(fā)生率[23]。根管沖洗溶液配合機械振動、超聲蕩洗或者激光,可以增大與根管內壁的接觸面積,更好的清除根管內感染物質和牙本質碎屑。
3根管充填對根尖微滲漏的影響
3.1根尖封閉劑? 根尖封閉劑要求具有抗菌、充填及潤滑等作用,常用的根管封閉劑有:氧化鋅丁香油封閉劑(ZOE)、氫氧化鈣類封閉劑(Vitapex)樹脂類封閉劑(AH Plus)及生物陶瓷類封閉劑(iRoot SP)等。ZOE抑菌鎮(zhèn)痛效果好,但流動性較差,根管側枝及彎曲根管難以進入,且遇唾液和水容易收縮,根尖微滲漏發(fā)生率高[24]。Vitapex具有殺菌、滅活內毒素、促進根尖硬組織的形成等作用,有可吸收性;iRoot SP可用于感染嚴重的根管,其對根管壁的機械嵌合力和化學粘接力強,根尖封閉效果優(yōu)越,超出根尖孔術后反應也較小;AH Plus流動性好,溶解性低,與牙本質粘接性較好,但對根尖周組織刺激性稍大[25]。Yanpiset K等[26]實驗發(fā)現(xiàn)iRoot SP的根尖封閉性能優(yōu)于AH Plus,根尖微滲漏低,兩者差異無統(tǒng)計學意義。Nair AV[27]等指出,iRoot SP能誘導骨組織再生,可生物封閉根尖孔,根管治療成功率高率。Shashirekha G等[28]發(fā)現(xiàn)AH Plus的根尖封閉效果較Vitpex好,根管充填完成后根尖微滲漏發(fā)生率小。
3.2根管充填方法? 研究發(fā)現(xiàn),充填不嚴密的根管出現(xiàn)根尖微滲漏的概率為45%,而充填致密的根管僅有7%會出現(xiàn)根尖微滲漏[29]。目前根管充填的方法包括冷側壓根管充填法、熱牙膠根管充填法和Gutta Flow常溫流動牙膠充填法,熱牙膠根管充填法又分為熱牙膠垂直加壓充填法和固體核心載體充填法。不同的根管充填方法會影響根尖封閉效果:熱牙膠垂直加壓充填技術形成的根尖微滲漏顯著小于冷牙膠側壓法;固體核心載體充填產(chǎn)生根尖微滲漏的概率小于熱牙膠垂直加壓充填技術;常溫流動牙膠充填法的根尖微滲漏低于熱牙膠垂直加壓充填技術[30,31]。
4根管形態(tài)對根尖微滲漏的影響
根管形態(tài)復雜,包括根管側支、根尖分歧、根尖分叉、根管峽部和嚴重彎曲根管等,根管治療器械很難到達這些地方。因此,即使主根管,也很少和根管預備器械形態(tài)一致。無論使用何種根管預備器械和根管預備方法,都會不可避免的殘留未預備的根管壁,細菌、微生物、牙本質碎屑等聚集在此未預備區(qū)域,嚴重影響了根管的封閉性,加大了根尖微滲漏的發(fā)生率[32]。根管數(shù)目的復雜性也常出現(xiàn)致因遺漏根管而導致根管治療失敗的現(xiàn)象?,F(xiàn)有根管治療的材料和器械都是針對圓形根管橫截面設計的,因此,扁圓形根管內壁在預備時管常會遺留較多的未切削部分,易發(fā)生根尖微滲漏[33]。根管直徑和錐度較大(相比根管銼)的根管根管充填完后發(fā)生根尖微滲漏的概率較高[34]。
5總結
根管預備、沖洗、充填各個步驟以及根管形態(tài)等都可能影響根尖微滲漏的發(fā)生,而根尖微漏則直接影響根管治療的遠期效果和成功率。因此,注重根管治療的每個環(huán)節(jié),減少和預防根尖微滲漏的發(fā)生,防止根管再感染,是根管治療的重要內容。
參考文獻:
[1]Jafari F,Jafari S.Importance and methodologies of endodontic micro-leakage studies:A systematic review[J].J Clin Exp Dent,2017,9(6):812-819.
[2]?譈stün Y,Aslan T,Sekerci AE,et al.Evaluation of the Reliability of Cone-beam ComPuted TomograPhy Scanning and Electronic APex Locator Measurements in Working Length Determination of Teeth with Large PeriaPical Lesions[J].J Endod,2016,42(9):1334-1337.
[3]Amaral CCF,Ormiga F,Boldrini LC,et al.Evaluation of the effects of the solution used for electrochemical dissolution of nickel-titanium endodontic files on dentine structure,microhardness and cell viability[J].Int Endod J,2018,51(12):1434-1445.
[4]Madani ZS,Goudarzipor D,Haddadi A,et al.A CBCT Assessment of apical transportation in root canals prepared with hand K-flexofile and K3 rotary instruments[J].Iran Endod J,2015,10(1):44-48.
[5]Nagendrababu V,Ahmed HMA.Shaping properties and outcomes of nickel-titanium rotary and reciprocation systems using micro-computed tomography:a systematic review[J].Quintessence Int,2019,50(3):186-195.
[6]Marceliano-Alves MF,Sousa-Neto MD,F(xiàn)idel SR,et al.Shaping ability of single-file reciprocating and heat-treated multifile rotary systems:A micro-CT study[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(12):1129-1136.
[7]Ahn SY,Kim HC,Kim E.Effects of Nickel-Titanium Instruments with Reciprocating or Continuous Rotation Motion:A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies[J].J Endod,2016,42(7):1009-1017.
[8]王全禹,薛明.鎳鈦器械根管預備對牙本質微裂的影響及預防[J].中國實用口腔科雜志,2017,10(4):207-211.
[9]Nishad SV,Shivamurthy GB.Comparative Analysis of Apical Root Crack Propagation after Root Canal Preparation at Different Instrumentation Lengths Using ProTaper Universal,ProTaper Next and ProTaper Gold Rotary Files:An In vitro Study[J].Contemp Clin Dent,2018,9(Suppl 1):S34-S38.
[10]Kumari MR,Krishnaswamy MM.Comparative Analysis of Crack Propagation in Roots with Hand and Rotary Instrumentation of the Root Canal-An Ex-vivo Study[J].J Clin Diagn Res,2016,10(7):ZC16-ZC19.
[11]Qiu N,Wang CY,Liu YF,et al.Comparison of the shaping ability of three NiTi rotary instruments in the preparation of simulated curved root canals[J].Shanghai Journal of Stomatology,2016,25(2):191-194.
[12]Bayram HM,Bayram E,Ocak M,et al.Micro-computed Tomographic Evaluation of Dentinal Microcrack Formation after Using New Heat-treated Nickel-titanium Systems[J].J Endod,2017,43(10):1736-1739.
[13]Wang NN,Ge JY,Xie SJ,et al.Analysis of Mtwo rotary instruments and Reciprocating Instruments:A Mini-Review of Clinical Studies[J].Open Dent J,2018,25(12):864-872.
[14]Fernández-Pazos G,Martín-Biedma B,Varela-Pati?觡o P,et al.Fracture and deformation of ProTaper Next instruments after clinical use[J].J Clin Exp Dent,2018,10(11):e1091-e1095.
[15]Ertas H,Iysal B.Effect of separated rotary instruments on the apical micro-leakage of root canal fillings[J].J Dent Fac Atatürk Uni,2014,24(2):246-251.
[16]Singh S,Singh M,Salgar AR,et al.Time-Dependent Effect of Various Irrigants for Root Canal on Smear Layer Removal[J].J Pharm Bioallied Sci,2019,11(Suppl 1):S51-S58.
[17]Zargar N,Dianat O,Asnaashari M,et al.The Effect of Smear Layer on Antimicrobial Efficacy of Three Root Canal Irrigants[J].Iran Endod J,2015,10(3):179-183.
[18]Verma M,Meena N,Kumari RA,et al.Comparison of apical debris extrusion during root canal preparation using instrumentation techniques with two operating principles: An in vitro study[J].J Conserv Dent,2017,20(2):96-99.
[19]Mohammadi Z,Yaripour S,Shalavi S,et al.Root Canal Irrigants and Dentin Bonding:An Update[J].Iran Endod J, 2017,12(2):131-136.
[20]Lahorsoler E,Mirandarius J,Brunetllobet L,et al.In vitro study of the apical micro-leakage with resilon root canal filling using different final endodontic irrigants[J].J Clin Exp Dent,2015,7(2):e212-e217.
[21]Balasubramanian SK,Saraswathi V,Ballal NV,et al.A comparative study of the quality of apical seal in resilon/epiphany SE fol-lowing intra canal irrigation with 17% EDTA,10% citric Acid,and MTAD as Final Irrigants-A dye leakage study under vacuum[J].J Clin Diagn Res,2017,11(2):ZC20-ZC24.
[22]Arslan D,Guneser MB,Dincer AN,et al.Comparison of Smear Layer Removal Ability of QMix with Different Activation Techniques[J].J Endod,2016,42(8):1279-1285.
[23]Shin JH,Lee DY,Lee SH.Comparison of antimicrobial activity of traditional and new developed root sealers against pathogens related root canal[J].J Dent Sci,2018,13(1):54-59.
[24]Phukan AH,Mathur S,Sandhu M,et al.The effect of different root canal sealers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth-in vitro study[J].Dent Res J (Isfahan),2017,14(6):382-388.
[25]Al-Haddad AY,Kutty MG,Abu Kasim NH,et al.The effect of moisture conditions on the constitution of two bioceramic-based root canal sealers[J].J Dent Sci,2017,12(4):340-346.
[26]Yanpiset K,Banomyong D,Chotvorrarak K,et al.Bacteage and micro-computed tomography evaluation in round-shaped canals obturated with bioceramic cone and sealer using matched single cone technique[J].Restor Dent Endod,2018,43(3):e30-e34.
[27]Nair AV,Nayak M,Prasada LK,et al.Comparative Evaluation of Cytotoxicity and Genotoxicity of Two Bioceramic Sealers on Fibroblast Cell Line:An in vitro Study[J].J Contemp Dent Pract,2018,19(6):656-666.
[28]Shashirekha G,Jena A,Pattanaik S,et al.Assessment of pain and dissolution of apically extruded sealers and their effect on the periradicular tissues[J].J Conserv Dent,2018,21(5):546-550.
[29]Riis A,Taschieri S,Del Fabbro M,et al.Tooth Survival after Surgical or Nonsurgical Endodontic Retreatment:Long-term Follow-up of a Randomized Clinical Trial[J].J Endod,2018,44(10):1480-1486.
[30]Balto HA.Obturation Techniques Allow Microbial Leakage Unless Protected[J].J Prosthodont,2016,25(3):2224-2228.
[31]Lone MM,Khan FR.Evaluation Of Micro Leakage Of Root Canals Filled With Different Obturation Techniques:An In Vitro Study[J].J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad,2018,30(1):35-39.
[32]Pedullà E,Plotino G,Grande NM,et al.Shaping ability of two nickel-titanium instruments activated by continuous rotation or adaptive motion:a micro-computed tomography study[J].Clin Oral Investig,2016,20(8):2227-2233.
[33]Mounce R.Optimal Shaping of Root Canal Systems:Demonstrating the Use of Controlled Memor Ni-Ti Files[J].Dent Today,2015,34(7):110-114.
[34]余偉明,吉建新,陳麗明,等.根管直徑和錐度對根充效果的影響[J].深圳中西醫(yī)結合雜志,2016,26(9):1-3.
收稿日期:2019-4-4;修回日期:2019-4-14
編輯/王海靜