Song Tao, Xu Pei-cheng, Li Yu
Department of Stomatology, Shanghai Xuhui Dental Diseases Centre. Shanghai 200032, China.
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2011 Jun;20(3):296-9.
To compare the prosthetic outcome of screw- and cement-retained implant-supported restorations of the fixed bridges.
A total of 185 Straumann implants were placed in the alveolar bone of 68 partially edentulous patients from Jan. 2006 to Dec. 2007. All of them were 2 to 6 units of combination crowns with Straumann system. Then they were followed up for 3 years. In each group, the retention, influence on hard and soft tissues, passive fitting and rupture strength of the ceramic layer were evaluated. The data was analyzed with SPSS12.0 software package.
There were more advantages of retention and the rupture strength of the ceramic layer in the cement-retained group, while there was less influence on the hard and soft tissues, and more facility of maintenance and reparation in the screwed-retained group. The difference between the two groups was statistically not significant (P>0.05).
The clinical outcomes of implant restorations are satisfactory, either screw-retained or cement-retained. Cement retention is used in 2 to 3 unit combination crowns, while screw retention is more suitable for complicated cases.
比较固定桥种植体支持式修复中螺钉固位和粘结固位修复体的修复效果。
2006年1月至2007年12月,共68例部分牙列缺损患者的牙槽骨内植入185枚士卓曼种植体。所有病例均采用士卓曼系统的2至6单位联合冠修复。随后对其进行3年随访。评估每组修复体的固位力、对软硬组织的影响、被动适合性以及陶瓷层的破裂强度。采用SPSS12.0软件包对数据进行分析。
粘结固位组在固位力和陶瓷层破裂强度方面优势更明显,而螺钉固位组对软硬组织的影响更小,维护和修复更简便。两组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。
螺钉固位或粘结固位的种植修复临床效果均令人满意。粘结固位适用于2至3单位联合冠,而螺钉固位更适合复杂病例。