Engquist Bo, Astrand Per, Anzén Bengt, Dahlgren Simon, Engquist Eva, Feldmann Hartmut, Karlsson Ulf, Nord Per Guńnar, Sahlholm Sten, Svärdström Pia
Department of Prosthodontics, Public Dental Health Care, Linköping and Norrköping, Sweden.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2004;6(2):90-100. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2004.tb00031.x.
Most implant treatment is performed with a two-stage surgical procedure. A disadvantage of these implant treatments is that they are time-consuming.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the results of early loading in the edentulous mandible and to compare those results with treatment results of one-stage surgery followed by a healing period and with two-stage surgery.
The material comprises four treatment groups with a total of 108 patients with edentulous lower jaws and 432 implants. All patients were treated with Brånemark implants (Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) with a turned surface and fixed prostheses in the lower jaw, supported by four implants. The patients in group A were treated with a one-stage procedure, a two-piece implant, and a 3-month healing period before loading. Group B (control group) had a two-stage procedure, a two-piece implant, and a 3-month healing period. Group C had a one-stage procedure, a one-piece implant, and a 3-month healing period. Group D was treated with a one-stage surgical procedure, a two-piece implant, and early loading (within 3 weeks). All patients were provided with a Procera Implant Bridge (Nobel Biocare) with a framework made by computer-assisted milling of one piece of pure titanium. All patients have been followed up for 1 year.
The survival rates were 93.2 to 93.3% in the experimental groups and 97.5% in the control group. The difference was not statistically significant. The measurements of the marginal bone level demonstrated a mean bone loss of 0.8 mm between fixture insertion and the 1-year examination in patients with early loading (group D) whereas the bone loss in patients who underwent a healing period before loading was 1.3 to 1.6 mm. The difference between the control group and the group with early loading was significant.
Survival rates for patients treated with a one-stage procedure were lower than survival rates for patients treated according to a "classical concept," but the differences were not statistically significant. There was no difference between treatment results with one-piece and two-piece implants. The implant loss in patients with early loading was probably caused by overloading, and careful supervision of occlusal loading is recommended. Early loading gave significantly less marginal bone loss when compared with two-stage surgery.
大多数种植治疗采用两阶段手术程序。这些种植治疗的一个缺点是耗时。
本研究的目的是评估无牙下颌早期负重的结果,并将这些结果与一期手术后经过愈合期的治疗结果以及两期手术的结果进行比较。
材料包括四个治疗组,共有108例无牙下颌患者和432颗种植体。所有患者均使用表面经过车削处理的Brånemark种植体(瑞典哥德堡诺贝尔生物科技公司),在下颌采用四颗种植体支持的固定修复体。A组患者采用一期手术、两件式种植体,并在负重前有3个月的愈合期。B组(对照组)采用两期手术、两件式种植体,并在负重前有3个月的愈合期。C组采用一期手术、一体式种植体,并在负重前有3个月的愈合期。D组采用一期手术、两件式种植体并早期负重(3周内)。所有患者均使用Procera种植桥(诺贝尔生物科技公司),其支架由计算机辅助铣削一块纯钛制成。所有患者均随访1年。
实验组的存活率为93.2%至93.3%,对照组为97.5%。差异无统计学意义。边缘骨水平测量显示,早期负重患者(D组)在种植体植入至1年检查期间平均骨吸收为0.8mm,而在负重前经过愈合期的患者骨吸收为1.3至1.6mm。对照组与早期负重组之间的差异具有统计学意义。
采用一期手术治疗的患者存活率低于按照“经典概念”治疗的患者,但差异无统计学意义。一体式和两件式种植体的治疗结果无差异。早期负重患者的种植体丢失可能是由于过度负重导致的,建议仔细监督咬合负重情况。与两期手术相比,早期负重导致的边缘骨吸收明显更少。