|
|
|
| Comparison of Clinical Efficacy among Vitapex Apexification, MTA and iRoot BP Plus Apical Barrier Techniques in the Treatment of Young Permanent Teeth with Apical Periodontitis |
| YAN Chunhua, HUANG Chunya, LI Xiaoqing |
| Department of Dentistry, Nantong Rici Hospital, Nantong Jiangsu 226001 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract 【Objective】 To compare the clinical efficacy of Vitapex apexification with MTA and iRoot BP Plus apical barrier techniques in the treatment of young permanent teeth with apical periodontitis. 【Methods】 A total of 103 patients (103 affected teeth) with chronic apical periodontitis of young permanent teeth who visited our hospital from June 2021 to May 2024 were selected. According to different treatment methods, they were divided into Vitapex group (34 patients, 34 affected teeth, treated with Vitapex apexification), MTA group (33 patients, 33 affected teeth, treated with mineral trioxide aggregate MTA apical barrier technique), and iRoot BP Plus group (36 patients, 36 affected teeth, treated with bioceramic material iRoot BP Plus apical barrier technique). The overall clinical effective rates at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery were compared among the three groups. Additionally, root growth and development, average number of treatment sessions, and average treatment duration were compared before and after treatment among the three groups. 【Results】 At 6 and 12 months after surgery, the overall clinical effective rates in MTA group and iRoot BP Plus group were higher than those in Vitapex group, and the overall clinical effective rate in iRoot BP Plus group was higher than that in MTA group, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). According to X-ray follow-up examinations, root lengthening and apical foramen closure in Vitapex group at 1 year after surgery were superior to those in MTA group and iRoot BP Plus group, with statistically significant differences (all P<0.05). The average number of treatment sessions in MTA group and iRoot BP Plus group was fewer than that in Vitapex group, and the average treatment duration was significantly shorter than that in Vitapex group, with statistically significant differences (all P<0.05). 【Conclusion】 MTA and iRoot BP Plus apical barrier techniques demonstrate better clinical efficacy than Vitapex apexification in the treatment of young permanent teeth with chronic apical periodontitis, with shorter treatment duration and fewer follow-up visits. However, Vitapex apexification shows greater advantages in promoting continued root development and apical foramen closure.
|
|
Received: 12 December 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 代云飞,刘鹤,彭楚芳,等. 年轻恒牙牙髓再生治疗术后36个月的临床疗效评估[J].北京大学学报(医学版),2023,55(4):729.
[2] 李琰,闫倩,吴蕾. iRoot BP Plus根尖屏障术在年轻恒牙根尖炎中的临床疗效观察[J].中国药物与临床,2021,21(1):70.
[3] 吕丽华,苏吉梅. 年轻恒牙外伤性牙齿固连研究进展[J].中国实用口腔科杂志,2020,13(9):559-563.
[4] 胡佳,王秀清,卢国英,等. 再生性牙髓治疗在成人根尖发育不全恒牙应用的研究进展[J].国际口腔医学杂志,2023,50(6):686-695.
[5] 汪俊. 再生性牙髓治疗、根尖诱导成形术与根尖屏障术常见临床问题解析[J].中华口腔医学杂志,2023,58(11):1097-1102.
[6] 邱德春,卫峥,张倩,等. 三联抗生素与氢氧化钙在牙髓血运重建中根管消毒效果的回顾性分析[J].实用口腔医学杂志,2021,37(4):513-516.
[7] 王少华,熊战胜,樊丽娟,等. 慢性根尖周炎影响因素及其根管内病原菌定植情况[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2023,33(21):3279-3283.
[8] 周建,苏盈盈,王松灵. 无细胞再生性牙髓治疗的现状及展望[J].华西口腔医学杂志,2022,40(1):1-6.
[9] 严飞,姚宁. 不同根管形态年轻前磨牙根尖诱导成形术的临床疗效分析[J].口腔医学,2022,42(2):149-152.
[10] 王涛,朱顶贵,郭世梁,等. 三种方法治疗年轻恒牙根尖周病的效果分析[J].中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版),2021,15(6):341-347.
[11] 王晨,杨勇,刘佼佼. 不同材料形成根尖屏障修复根尖未发育完全恒牙疗效比较[J].临床军医杂志,2020,48(7):798-799.
[12] 游月华,周珊羽,元博,等. 生物陶瓷材料iRoot BP Plus和矿物三氧化聚合体MTA应用于成人恒牙根尖屏障术的临床疗效分析[J].实用医学杂志,2021,37(7):869-873.
[13] 赵燕坤. 三种治疗方法对年轻恒牙根尖周病变患儿的影响[J].中外医学研究,2022,20(24):47-51.
[14] 张欣,张海英,谢咏梅. 五种临床常用方法对弯曲根管内VITAPEX清除效率的研究[J].北京口腔医学,2020,28(4):217-219.
[15] 张琳媚,王洁琪. 恒牙根尖周炎伴根尖开放治疗的疗效分析[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2023,39(2):91-93. |
|
|
|
2026, Vol. 43 
