摘要
目的:探究窄种植体用于修复小间隙牙列缺损的修复效果。方法:选取2017年1月~2019年1月我院收治的小间隙牙列缺损患者64例,随机分为常规种植体组和窄种植体组,每组各32例。常规种植体组患者行非翻瓣微创种植术中常规种植体修复治疗,窄种植体组行非翻瓣微创种植术中窄种植体修复治疗。评价两组患者临床指标变化、牙槽骨吸收量、种植体周围龈沟液量、菌斑指数、龈沟出血指数、生活质量、治疗效果、种植体存留率和并发症发生情况。结果:两组患者手术时间比较,无统计学差异(P>0.05);窄种植体组患者肿胀、不适恢复时间、术后抗生素生使用时间、术后激素使用时间均短于常规种植体组(P<0.05)。窄种植体组患者种植体周围龈沟液量、菌斑指数、龈沟出血指数均低于常规种植体组(P<0.05)。窄种植体组术后1个月、3个月、6个月牙槽骨吸收量均低于常规种植体组(P<0.05)。术后6个月,窄种植体组患者术后生活质量高于常规种植体组(P<0.05)。术后6个月,窄种植体组治疗总有效率高于常规种植体组(P<0.05)。术后7 d,窄种植体组并发症发生率与常规种植体组无统计学差异(P>0.05)。术后随访1年,窄种植体组种植体存留率显著高于常规种植体组(P<0.05)。结论:小间隙牙列缺损患者行非翻瓣微创种植术中窄种植体修复治疗,可降低骨吸收量,临床效果理想。
Objective:To explore the value of narrow implants in repairing small gap dentition defects.Methods:A total of 64 patients with small-gap dentition defect admitted to our hospital from January 2017 to January 2019 were selected,andall patients were randomly divided into the conventional implant group and the narrow implant group,each with 32 patients.Patients in the conventional implant group received conventional implant repair during minimally invasive non-flap implantation,while patients in the narrow implant group received minimally invasive non-flap implantation during narrow implant repair.The changes of clinical indicators,alveolar bone absorption,gingival crevicular fluid around implants,plaque index,gingival crevicular bleeding index,quality of life,treatment effect,implant survival rate and complications were evaluated.Results:There was no significant difference between the two groups(P>0.05),the time of swelling,discomfort recovery,antibiotic use and hormone use in the narrow implant group were shorter than those in the conventional implant group(P<0.05).The gingival crevicular fluid volume,plaque index and sulcus bleeding index in the narrow implant group were lower than those in the conventional implant group(P<0.05).The alveolar bone resorption of narrow implant group was lower than that of the conventional implant group respectively in different follow-up time(P<0.05).The improvement of life quality in narrow implant group was higher than that in conventional implant group(P<0.05).Six months later, the improvement of life quality in narrow implant group was higher(P<0.05), the total effective rate of narrow implant group was higher than that of conventional implant group(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between two groups at 7 days after operation(P>0.05). The survival rate of the narrow implant group was significantly higher than that of the conventional implant group with one-year follow-up(P<0.05).Conclusion:In the patients with small gap dentition de
作者
欧阳骞
殷凌云
于鸿滨
李德宏
杨向红
OUYANG Qian;YIN Ling-yun;YU Hong-bin;LI De-hong;YANG Xiang-hong(Department of Stomatology,Yan'an Hospital Affiliated to Kunming Medical University,Yunan Kunming 650000,China)
出处
《临床口腔医学杂志》
2021年第1期36-40,共5页
Journal of Clinical Stomatology
基金
云南省教育厅科学研究基金(2021J0276)
云南省高层次卫生科技人才医学后备人才(H-2018089)。
关键词
非翻瓣微创种植术
窄种植体
小间隙牙列缺损
Non-valved minimally invasive implantation
Narrow implant
Small space dentition defect
