牙髓学的争议。

G. Bergenholtz, L. Spångberg
{"title":"牙髓学的争议。","authors":"G. Bergenholtz,&nbsp;L. Spångberg","doi":"10.1177/154411130401500204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Diseases of the dental pulp often have an infectious origin, and treatments are aimed to control infections of the root canal system. Endodontic treatment principles originally evolved on the basis of trial and error, and only in recent decades have scientific methods been adopted to support clinical strategies. Yet, relevant research on the disease processes, their diagnoses, and efficient treatment are rare in the endodontic literature. Hence, the advancement of biologically based knowledge significant to clinical endodontics has been slow. Therefore, many differences of opinion still prevail in this field of dentistry. This review highlights and analyzes the background of some of the more heavily debated issues in recent years. Specifically, it deals with disagreements regarding the clinical management of pulpal exposures by caries in the adult dentition, definitions of success and failure of endodontic therapy, and causes of and measures to control infections of the root canal system. Clearly, a most apparent gap in the published endodontic literature is the lack of randomized clinical trials that address the more significant controversial matters relating to the management of pulpal wounds, medication, and the number of appointments required for the treatment of infected root canals. However, trials in endodontics require extremely long follow-up periods if valid conclusions are to be generated. Therefore, it is not to be expected that there will be rapid solutions to these issues in the foreseeable future.</p>","PeriodicalId":77086,"journal":{"name":"Critical reviews in oral biology and medicine : an official publication of the American Association of Oral Biologists","volume":"15 2","pages":"99-114"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/154411130401500204","citationCount":"199","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"CONTROVERSIES IN ENDODONTICS.\",\"authors\":\"G. Bergenholtz,&nbsp;L. Spångberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/154411130401500204\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Diseases of the dental pulp often have an infectious origin, and treatments are aimed to control infections of the root canal system. Endodontic treatment principles originally evolved on the basis of trial and error, and only in recent decades have scientific methods been adopted to support clinical strategies. Yet, relevant research on the disease processes, their diagnoses, and efficient treatment are rare in the endodontic literature. Hence, the advancement of biologically based knowledge significant to clinical endodontics has been slow. Therefore, many differences of opinion still prevail in this field of dentistry. This review highlights and analyzes the background of some of the more heavily debated issues in recent years. Specifically, it deals with disagreements regarding the clinical management of pulpal exposures by caries in the adult dentition, definitions of success and failure of endodontic therapy, and causes of and measures to control infections of the root canal system. Clearly, a most apparent gap in the published endodontic literature is the lack of randomized clinical trials that address the more significant controversial matters relating to the management of pulpal wounds, medication, and the number of appointments required for the treatment of infected root canals. However, trials in endodontics require extremely long follow-up periods if valid conclusions are to be generated. Therefore, it is not to be expected that there will be rapid solutions to these issues in the foreseeable future.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77086,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical reviews in oral biology and medicine : an official publication of the American Association of Oral Biologists\",\"volume\":\"15 2\",\"pages\":\"99-114\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/154411130401500204\",\"citationCount\":\"199\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical reviews in oral biology and medicine : an official publication of the American Association of Oral Biologists\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/154411130401500204\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical reviews in oral biology and medicine : an official publication of the American Association of Oral Biologists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/154411130401500204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 199

摘要

牙髓疾病通常有感染的根源,治疗的目的是控制根管系统的感染。根管治疗原则最初是在试验和错误的基础上发展起来的,直到最近几十年才采用科学的方法来支持临床策略。然而,在牙髓学文献中,对其发病过程、诊断和有效治疗的相关研究很少。因此,对临床牙髓学具有重要意义的生物学基础知识的进展缓慢。因此,在这一牙科领域仍然存在许多不同的意见。这篇综述强调并分析了近年来一些争论较多的问题的背景。具体来说,本文讨论了关于成人牙列龋齿引起的牙髓暴露的临床处理、牙髓治疗成功和失败的定义、根管系统感染的原因和控制措施等方面的分歧。显然,在已发表的牙髓学文献中,一个最明显的差距是缺乏随机临床试验,这些试验解决了与牙髓伤口管理、药物治疗和感染根管治疗所需预约次数有关的更重要的争议问题。然而,如果要得出有效的结论,牙髓学的试验需要非常长的随访期。因此,不能指望在可预见的将来这些问题会迅速得到解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
CONTROVERSIES IN ENDODONTICS.

Diseases of the dental pulp often have an infectious origin, and treatments are aimed to control infections of the root canal system. Endodontic treatment principles originally evolved on the basis of trial and error, and only in recent decades have scientific methods been adopted to support clinical strategies. Yet, relevant research on the disease processes, their diagnoses, and efficient treatment are rare in the endodontic literature. Hence, the advancement of biologically based knowledge significant to clinical endodontics has been slow. Therefore, many differences of opinion still prevail in this field of dentistry. This review highlights and analyzes the background of some of the more heavily debated issues in recent years. Specifically, it deals with disagreements regarding the clinical management of pulpal exposures by caries in the adult dentition, definitions of success and failure of endodontic therapy, and causes of and measures to control infections of the root canal system. Clearly, a most apparent gap in the published endodontic literature is the lack of randomized clinical trials that address the more significant controversial matters relating to the management of pulpal wounds, medication, and the number of appointments required for the treatment of infected root canals. However, trials in endodontics require extremely long follow-up periods if valid conclusions are to be generated. Therefore, it is not to be expected that there will be rapid solutions to these issues in the foreseeable future.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信