United States Army Endodontic Residency Program, Fort Bragg, North Carolina; Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland.
United States Army Endodontic Residency Program, Fort Bragg, North Carolina; Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland.
J Endod. 2018 Feb;44(2):250-255. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.09.010. Epub 2017 Dec 8.
The protocols that endodontists implement for regenerative endodontic procedures (REPs) are unknown. The aim of this study was to examine current REP protocols among practicing endodontists in the United States.
A Web-based survey was sent to 4060 active members of the American Association of Endodontists (AAE). A total of 850 participants completed the survey, representing a 20.9% response rate.
Responses indicated 60% reported having performed REPs; most performed 1 to 3 per year. The most commonly selected source (60.8%) for the clinical protocol was the "AAE Clinical Considerations for a Regenerative Procedure." Time constraints were the most common reason why 92.4% of respondents did not report their REP cases to the AAE.org database; additionally, 15.5% were unaware of it. Almost half (49.8%) of the participants reported they would attempt an REP on a patient of any age. The most commonly used irrigants were >3% sodium hypochlorite at the first appointment and EDTA at the scaffold formation appointment. As the intracanal medicament, 52.2% used calcium hydroxide, whereas 23.5% used triple antibiotic paste. At the scaffold formation appointment, 77.1% used a local anesthetic without a vasoconstrictor, and 94.3% used a blood clot as the scaffold. Mineral trioxide aggregate was the coronal barrier most often selected. Considering factors most likely to encourage the use of REPs in the future, 79.8% reported the availability of good candidates followed by 40.1% who desired better evidence.
Based on the results of this survey, REP protocols appear to be heterogeneous and do not strictly conform to the "AAE Clinical Considerations for a Regenerative Procedure."
牙髓病医生实施再生性牙髓治疗(REP)的方案尚不清楚。本研究旨在调查美国执业牙髓病医生目前使用的 REP 方案。
对美国牙髓病协会(AAE)的 4060 名活跃成员进行了一项基于网络的调查。共有 850 名参与者完成了调查,回应率为 20.9%。
调查结果显示,60%的受访者表示曾进行过 REP,大多数人每年进行 1 至 3 次。最常选择的临床方案来源(60.8%)是“AAE 再生性治疗临床考虑因素”。92.4%的受访者未将其 REP 病例报告给 AAE.org 数据库的主要原因是时间限制;此外,15.5%的受访者不知道该数据库。近一半(49.8%)的参与者表示他们愿意为任何年龄的患者尝试 REP。最常使用的冲洗剂是第一次就诊时使用>3%次氯酸钠,支架形成就诊时使用 EDTA。52.2%的人在支架形成就诊时使用氢氧化钙作为根管内药物,而 23.5%的人使用三联抗生素糊剂。77.1%的人在支架形成就诊时使用不含血管收缩剂的局部麻醉剂,94.3%的人使用血凝块作为支架。矿物三氧化物聚合体是最常选择的冠方屏障。在考虑未来最有可能鼓励使用 REP 的因素时,79.8%的人报告说有良好的候选者,其次是 40.1%的人希望有更好的证据。
根据这项调查的结果,REP 方案似乎存在异质性,并不严格遵循“AAE 再生性治疗临床考虑因素”。