Shearer Jane, McManners Joseph
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Falkirk and District Royal Infirmary, Majors Loan, Falkirk, United Kingdom.
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Jul;47(5):386-8. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2008.09.015. Epub 2008 Nov 8.
Innovations in periradicular surgery for failed treatment of orthograde root canal disease have been well-documented. We know of no prospective studies that have compared success rates of conventional methods with these presumed advances. In this prospective randomised trial we compare the use of an ultrasonic retrotip with a microhead bur in the preparation of a retrograde cavity. Outcome was estimated clinically by estimation of pain, swelling, and sinus, and radiographically by looking at infill of bone and retrograde root filling 2 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Both methods used other surgical techniques including microinstruments to place the retrograde root filling. The success rate of the ultrasonic method was higher (all patients, n=26) than that of the microhead method (n=19 of 21). A larger study with longer follow up is required to consolidate this evidence.
对于正行根管治疗失败后的根尖周手术创新已有充分记录。我们所知,尚无前瞻性研究比较过传统方法与这些所谓进展的成功率。在这项前瞻性随机试验中,我们比较了超声倒充钻与微型裂钻在制备倒充填洞形中的应用。通过评估疼痛、肿胀和窦道进行临床预后评估,并在术后2周和6个月通过观察骨充填和倒充根管充填情况进行影像学预后评估。两种方法均使用了包括微型器械在内的其他手术技术来进行倒充根管充填。超声方法的成功率(所有患者,n = 26)高于微型裂钻方法(n = 21中的19例)。需要进行一项随访时间更长的更大规模研究来巩固这一证据。