Department of Oral Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Capa, Istanbul, Turkey.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010 Sep;21(9):980-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01957.x. Epub 2010 May 24.
The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and post-operative outcomes of a computer-aided implant surgery performed by bone- and mucosa-supported stereolithographic (SLA) guides against the standard technique.
Multiple- and single-type SLA guides from two commercial manufacturers were produced and a total of 341 implants were placed to 52 patients using the standard technique (Control group), bone- (bone-supported guide [BSG] group) and mucosa-supported SLA guides (Flapless group) in 21, 16 and 15 patients, respectively. Surgical duration (min), number of analgesics (tablets) as well as hemorrhage, difficulty in mouth opening (or trismus) and other incidences were recorded. Pain and swelling was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS). Parametric and non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis (P<.05).
The mean surgery duration (23.53+/-5.48 min) and the number of analgesics consumed (four tablets) in the Flapless group were lower than those in the control (68.71+/-11.4 min and 10 tablets) and BSG groups (60.94+/-13.07 min and 11 tablets, P<0.01). The change in pain scores (VAS) and the number of analgesics consumed in time were statistically significant (P<0.01 and 0.05, respectively) and the Flapless group reported a lower pain score than the BSG (P<0.01) and Control groups (P<0.001). The Flapless group experienced less hemorrhage (chi(2)=4.12, P=0.041 on the day of surgery) and fewer instances of trismus (chi(2)=6.91, P=0.031 the day after surgery). The differences in early-term failures were not statistically significant between the groups (log-rank test: P=0.782).
The use of mucosa-supported single SLA guides for flapless implant placement may help reduce the surgery duration, pain intensity, related analgesic consumption and most other complications typical in the post-implant surgery period. However, there are particular drawbacks in both guide types and further studies are required to confirm the prosthodontic conformity and long-term success of implants placed using computer-assisted techniques.
本研究旨在比较骨支持和黏膜支持的立体光造型(SLA)导板辅助计算机辅助种植手术与传统技术的手术和术后效果。
使用两种商业制造商生产的多类型和单类型 SLA 导板,共 341 例种植体植入 52 名患者中,分别采用传统技术(对照组)、骨支持(骨支持导板[BSG]组)和黏膜支持 SLA 导板(无瓣组),在 21、16 和 15 名患者中进行。记录手术时间(分钟)、镇痛药(片)数量以及出血、张口困难(或牙关紧闭)等发生率。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估疼痛和肿胀。采用参数和非参数检验进行统计分析(P<.05)。
无瓣组的平均手术时间(23.53+/-5.48 分钟)和镇痛药用量(4 片)低于对照组(68.71+/-11.4 分钟和 10 片)和 BSG 组(60.94+/-13.07 分钟和 11 片,P<.01)。疼痛评分(VAS)的变化和镇痛药的使用时间在统计学上有显著差异(P<.01 和 0.05),无瓣组报告的疼痛评分低于 BSG 组(P<.01)和对照组(P<.001)。无瓣组术中出血量较少(卡方=4.12,P=0.041),术后牙关紧闭发生率较低(卡方=6.91,P=0.031)。各组早期失败率无统计学差异(对数秩检验:P=0.782)。
使用黏膜支持的单 SLA 导板进行无瓣种植体植入术可能有助于缩短手术时间、减轻疼痛强度、减少相关镇痛药的使用以及种植术后期的大多数其他并发症。然而,两种导板类型都存在特定的缺点,需要进一步研究来确认使用计算机辅助技术植入的种植体的修复符合度和长期成功率。