Suppr超能文献

一项比较1期和2期诺贝尔生物Care TiUnite种植体的前瞻性病例对照临床试验:在种植体整合期间通过Osstell Mentor进行共振频率分析。

A prospective case-control clinical trial comparing 1- and 2-stage Nobel Biocare TiUnite implants: resonance frequency analysis assessed by Osstell Mentor during integration.

作者信息

Tallarico Marco, Vaccarella Anna, Marzi Gian Carlo, Alviani Alessia, Campana Valentina

出版信息

Quintessence Int. 2011 Sep;42(8):635-44.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare implant stability between 1- and 2-stage Nobel Biocare TiUnite implants at various points of time after placement.

METHOD AND MATERIALS

Thirty patients were enrolled according to specific selection criteria to 1- or 2-stage treatment. Nineteen patients received 35 1-stage early loaded implants, and 10 patients received 26 2-stage early loaded implants. A total of 32 Branemark System MKIII Groovy and 29 NobelSpeedy Groovy implants were placed in the premolar and molar areas. Implant stability was assessed, in both groups, by means of the Osstell Mentor device at the time of implant placement and at 8 and 12 weeks. All patients were monitored from implant placement until 6 months of function.

RESULTS

One 1-stage complicated implant showed discontinuous measurements, and this patient was excluded from the analysis. In the maxilla (31 implants), there was no significant difference for implant stability quotients between the groups at any point (P > .05). In the mandible (29 implants), there was no significant difference for ISQ between the groups at baseline or 8 weeks (P > .05); however, a significant difference was found after 12 weeks (P = .0261). No implant failed between surgery and the end of the study, and there was an overall survival rate of 100%.

CONCLUSION

High ISQ values were found in both groups at each time point. One-stage technique is a viable alternative to 2-stage technique. The utilized implants seem to be suitable for early loading in both arches. NobelSpeedy Groovy showed a higher primary anchorage, especially in the maxilla.

摘要

目的

比较诺贝尔生物保健公司的1期和2期TiUnite种植体植入后不同时间点的种植体稳定性。

方法和材料

根据特定选择标准,30例患者接受1期或2期治疗。19例患者植入35颗1期早期负重种植体,10例患者植入26颗2期早期负重种植体。在前磨牙和磨牙区共植入32颗Branemark System MKIII Groovy种植体和29颗NobelSpeedy Groovy种植体。两组均在种植体植入时、8周和12周时使用Osstell Mentor设备评估种植体稳定性。所有患者从种植体植入开始监测至功能使用6个月。

结果

1颗1期复杂种植体测量结果不连续,该患者被排除在分析之外。在上颌(31颗种植体),两组间在任何时间点的种植体稳定性商数均无显著差异(P > 0.05)。在下颌(29颗种植体),两组在基线或8周时的种植体稳定性商数无显著差异(P > 0.05);然而,12周后发现有显著差异(P = 0.0261)。手术至研究结束期间无种植体失败,总生存率为100%。

结论

两组在每个时间点均获得了较高的种植体稳定性商数。1期技术是2期技术的可行替代方案。所使用的种植体似乎适用于上下颌的早期负重。NobelSpeedy Groovy种植体显示出更高的初期固位力,尤其是在上颌。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验