De Bruyn H, Kisch J, Collaert B, Lindén U, Nilner K, Dvärsäter L
Centre Periodontology and Implantology, Brussels, Belgium.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2001;3(4):176-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2001.tb00139.x.
Originally, the Brånemark System was used as a two-stage surgical procedure. Comparable clinical results have made one-stage and early-loading concepts possible alternatives in the edentulous mandible. From the patient's point of view, the financial aspect of implant treatment is important. In an attempt to decrease financial burden, the reduction of surgical interventions and reduction of the number of implants could be considered.
This prospective multicenter study evaluated (1) the 1- and 3-year success rates of implants loaded within 1 month after one-stage surgery with a fixed 10- to 12-unit bridge on three regular platform Brånemark System implants in the mandible, (2) the outcome of the prosthetic treatment, and (3) the opinion of patients regarding the treatment procedure.
Of 20 patients, 19 received five implants in the mandible, of which three were functionally loaded with the one-stage technique (group 1). The loaded implants were inserted in a tripodal position, one implant in the symphysis and two located anterior of the mental foramen in the bicuspid area. Two additional implants were inserted for safety reasons but were not intended to be included in the restoration. These two additional implants served as either an unloaded one-stage control implant (group 2) or an unloaded control implant installed with the submerged technique (group 3). Immediately after surgery, the implants were loaded with a relined denture. The patients received a 10- to 12-unit prosthetic reconstruction an average 31 days (range, 4-53 d) after surgery. Implant stability was clinically checked at 3, 12, and 36 months. Radiographs were taken at corresponding follow-up visits to calculate bone-to-implant level and marginal bone resorption.
Six of 60 functionally loaded implants (10%) and 3 of 20 prostheses (15%) failed within the first year. The cumulative implant failure rate in group 1, both after 1 and after 3 years, was 9.5%. No implant failure occurred in the control groups 2 and 3. The average marginal bone level measured at 1 and 3 years was 1.6 mm (SD = 0.8 mm) and 2.1 mm (SD = 0.2 mm), respectively, for group 1; 1.5 mm (SD = 1.3 mm) and 2.4 mm (SD = 0.6 mm), respectively, for group 2; 0.8 mm (SD = 1.4 mm) and 0.7 mm (SD = 0.9 mm), respectively, for group 3.
The results of treatment using three regular platform Brånemark System implants supporting a fixed mandibular arch reconstruction were less favorable than the outcome that can be expected with a standard four- to six-implant with one-stage surgery.
最初,布兰emark系统采用两阶段手术程序。类似的临床结果使单阶段和早期负重概念成为无牙下颌骨治疗的可能替代方案。从患者角度来看,种植治疗的经济因素很重要。为减轻经济负担,可考虑减少手术干预次数和种植体数量。
这项前瞻性多中心研究评估了:(1)在下颌骨使用3颗常规平台布兰emark系统种植体,通过单阶段手术在1个月内植入并连接固定的10至12单位桥体后,1年和3年的种植体成功率;(2)修复治疗的效果;(3)患者对治疗程序的看法。
20例患者中,19例在下颌骨植入5颗种植体,其中3颗采用单阶段技术进行功能负重(第1组)。负重种植体呈三脚架位置植入,1颗位于正中联合,2颗位于双尖牙区颏孔前方。出于安全考虑额外植入2颗种植体,但不打算纳入修复。这2颗额外种植体分别作为单阶段非负重对照种植体(第2组)或采用潜入式技术植入的非负重对照种植体(第3组)。术后立即用重衬义齿对种植体进行负重。患者术后平均31天(范围4 - 53天)接受10至12单位的修复重建。在3个月、12个月和36个月时进行临床种植体稳定性检查。在相应随访时拍摄X线片以计算骨与种植体水平及边缘骨吸收情况。
60颗功能负重种植体中有6颗(10%)及20个修复体中有3个(15%)在第一年内失败。第1组种植体1年和3年后的累积失败率为9.5%。第2组和第3组对照组未发生种植体失败。第1组1年和3年时测量的平均边缘骨水平分别为1.6毫米(标准差 = 0.8毫米)和2.1毫米(标准差 = 0.2毫米);第2组分别为1.5毫米(标准差 = 1.3毫米)和2.4毫米(标准差 = 0.6毫米);第3组分别为0.8毫米(标准差 = 1.4毫米)和0.7毫米(标准差 = 0.9毫米)。
使用3颗常规平台布兰emark系统种植体支持固定下颌弓重建的治疗结果不如标准的单阶段植入4至6颗种植体的预期结果理想。