Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, Cheonan, Republic of Korea.
J Adv Prosthodont. 2013 May;5(2):172-8. doi: 10.4047/jap.2013.5.2.172. Epub 2013 May 30.
The purpose of this study was to assess the difference in efficacy between calcium metaphosphate (CMP)-coated implant fixtures and conventional resorbable blasted media (RBM) processed implant fixtures.
This study targeted 50 implants from 44 patients who visited Dankook University Dental Hospital. Implantations were done separately for RBM treated and CMP-coated implants, although their design was the same. Calcium metaphosphate has a quicker biodegradation process through hydrolysis compared to other phosphate calcium groups. For the first year of the implantation, the resorption volume of marginal bone analyzed via radiography and perio-test value were measured, under the check plan. Their analyses were composed of a non-inferiority trials test. A 95% level of reliability was used.
In the comparative analysis of the resorption volume of marginal bone and the perio-test value, no statistically significant difference was found between the CMP-coated implants and RBM implants.
One year after the implant placement, CMP-coated implants were found not to be inferior to the conventional RBM implants.
本研究旨在评估钙磷灰石(CMP)涂层种植体与传统可吸收喷砂介质(RBM)处理种植体之间疗效的差异。
本研究针对 44 名患者的 50 个种植体,这些患者均就诊于韩国耽津大学牙科学院。尽管设计相同,但 RBM 处理和 CMP 涂层种植体的植入是分开进行的。与其他磷酸钙相比,钙磷灰石通过水解具有更快的生物降解过程。在植入后的第一年,根据检查计划,通过射线照相分析和牙周测试值测量边缘骨的吸收量。对它们进行了非劣效性试验测试。使用 95%的可信度。
在边缘骨吸收量和牙周测试值的比较分析中,CMP 涂层种植体和 RBM 种植体之间没有统计学上的显著差异。
种植体放置一年后,CMP 涂层种植体并不劣于传统的 RBM 种植体。