摘要
目的分析上颌窦底冲顶提升法与CAS-KIT(crestal approach-sinus kit)工具提升法在上颌窦底提升术(OSFE并同期种植患者的应用。方法回顾性分析2016年12月至2018年12月在南京医科大学第一附属医院接受OSFE并同期种植的99例患者临床资料,按OSFE术式分为3组,其中33例采用上颌窦底冲顶提升(冲顶组),35例采用CAS-KIT工具提升(CAS-KIT组),31例采用上颌窦底冲顶联合CAS-KIT工具提升(联合组)。比较3组种植系统、种植体数、愈合方式、术前后骨高度及提升幅度、种植失败及并发症发生率。结果 99例患者共计植入134枚种植体,其中40例植入53枚Osstem种植体,47例植入63枚Dentium种植体,12例植入18枚Nobel Guide种植体,3组植骨数量、种植系统、种植体数比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);冲顶组、CAS-KIT组、联合组中潜入式缝合例数分别为22例(66.67%)、20例(57.14%)、22例(70.97%),其余为非潜入式缝合,3组愈合方式比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);3组术后骨高度较术前均显著提升,CAS-KIT组、联合组术后骨高度及提升幅度均显著高于冲顶组(P<0.05),但CAS-KIT组与联合组术后骨高度及提升幅度比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);联合组未见种植失败及并发症发生,冲顶组种植失败位点数、术中穿孔、术后上颌窦炎及耳石症发生率分别为4.54%、9.09%、2.27%、2.27%,CAS-KIT组为6.25%、6.25%、2.08%、2.08%,但3组种植失败及并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论较颌窦底冲顶提升法,CAS-KIT工具提升法或两种提升方式联合应用在提升骨高度上优势更显著,但联合应用具有更高的种植成功比例及更低的并发症风险,值得临床重视。
Objective To analyze the application of maxillary sinus elevation and CAS-KIT(crestal approach-sinus kit) tool elevation in patients with osteotome sinus floor elevation(OSFE) with simultaneous implantation.Methods A total of 99 patients who underwent OSFE and simultaneous implantation in the hospital from December 2016 to December 2018 were grouped according to OSFE methods.Thirty-three patients underwent maxillary sinus elevation,and 35 patients underwent CAS-KIT tool elevation,and 31 patients underwent maxillary sinus elevation combined with CAS-KIT tool elevation.They were corresponding to floor group, CAS-KIT group and combined group.The implantation system,number of implants,healing methods,bone height and elevation degree before and after surgery and incidence rates of implantation failures and complications were compared among three groups.Results A total of 134 implants were implanted in 99 patients,and among them,40 cases were implanted with 53 Osstem implants,47 cases with 63 Dentium implants and 12 cases with 18 Nobel Guide implants.There were no significant differences in the number of bone grafting,implantation system and number of implants among three groups(P>0.05).The number of cases of submerged sutures in floor group,CAS-KIT group and combined group were 22(66.67%) cases,20(57.14%) cases and 22(70.97%) cases respectively.The rest were nonsubmerged sutures,and the difference of three groups of healing methods was not statistically significant(P>0.05).The bone height of three groups after surgery was significantly improved compared with before surgery,and the bone height and elevation degree in CASKIT group and combined group after surgery were significantly higher than those in floor group(P<0.05).But there were no significant differences in the bone height and elevation degree after surgery between CAS-KIT group and combined group(P>0.05).Failure and complications did not occur in combined group,and the incidence rates of failure sites,intraoperative perforation,postoperative maxillary sinusiti
作者
席云昊
卜寿山
XI Yun-hao;BU Shou-shan(Department of Stomatology,the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University,Nanjing 210029,Jiangsu,China)
出处
《东南国防医药》
2020年第2期133-137,共5页
Military Medical Journal of Southeast China
基金
江苏省卫生计生委科研项目(H201642)。
