Suppr超能文献

一项评估和比较在增强型和非增强型拔牙窝中植入物的随机临床试验:3 年结果。

A randomized clinical trial to evaluate and compare implants placed in augmented versus non-augmented extraction sockets: 3-year results.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.

出版信息

J Periodontol. 2012 Jul;83(7):836-46. doi: 10.1902/jop.2011.110205. Epub 2011 Dec 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The alveolar ridge undergoes reabsorption and atrophy subsequent to tooth removal and thus exhibits a wide range of dimensional changes. Preservation of the alveolar crest after tooth extraction is essential to enhance the surgical site before implant fixture placement. The aim of this randomized clinical study is to investigate and compare the need for additional augmentation procedures at implant insertion, as well as the success rate and marginal bone loss for implants placed in the grafted sites versus those placed in naturally healed sites.

METHODS

Forty patients with ≥1 hopeless tooth were randomly allocated to: 1) a test group, receiving extraction and grafting corticocancellous porcine bone; and 2) a control group, receiving extraction without any graft. After 7 months of healing, implants were inserted in each of the sites. The implants were submerged and loaded after 4 months with metal-ceramic rehabilitation. The follow-up included evaluation of implant diameter and length, the need for additional augmentation procedures at implant placement, implant failure, and marginal bone level changes. All patients were followed over a 3-year period.

RESULTS

One implant failed in the control group at the second stage of surgery (6 months after placement); one implant failed in the test group after 2 years of loading. The cumulative implant success rate at the 3-year follow-up visit reached 95% for both groups. No statistically significant differences were detected for marginal bone changes between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

It was concluded that implants placed into grafted extraction sockets exhibited a clinical performance similar to implants placed into non-grafted sites in terms of implant survival and marginal bone loss. However, grafted sites allowed placement of larger implants and required less augmentation procedures at implant placement when compared to naturally healed sites.

摘要

背景

拔牙后牙槽嵴会发生吸收和萎缩,因此表现出广泛的尺寸变化。拔牙后牙槽嵴的保存对于增强种植体放置前的手术部位至关重要。本随机临床研究的目的是调查和比较在种植体插入时需要额外的增强程序,以及放置在移植部位的种植体的成功率和边缘骨丢失与放置在自然愈合部位的种植体的成功率和边缘骨丢失。

方法

将 40 名有≥1 颗无望牙的患者随机分为:1)实验组,接受皮质松质猪骨拔牙和移植;2)对照组,不进行任何移植。在 7 个月的愈合期后,在每个部位插入种植体。植入物在 4 个月后用金属-陶瓷修复体进行淹没和加载。随访包括评估种植体直径和长度、种植体放置时需要额外增强程序、种植体失败和边缘骨水平变化。所有患者均随访 3 年。

结果

对照组有 1 个种植体在第二期手术(放置后 6 个月)时失败;实验组有 1 个种植体在加载 2 年后失败。两组在 3 年随访时的累积种植体成功率均达到 95%。两组之间的边缘骨变化无统计学差异。

结论

植入物放置在移植拔牙窝中的临床表现与植入物放置在非移植部位的临床表现相似,在种植体存活率和边缘骨丢失方面。然而,与自然愈合部位相比,移植部位允许放置更大的种植体,并在种植体放置时需要较少的增强程序。

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