Suppr超能文献

单纯牙槽嵴扩展或联合引导骨再生以促进在狭窄牙槽嵴中植入种植体:一项回顾性研究。

Ridge expansion alone or in combination with guided bone regeneration to facilitate implant placement in narrow alveolar ridges: a retrospective study.

作者信息

Tang Yu-Long, Yuan Jing, Song Ying-Liang, Ma Wei, Chao Xie, Li De-Hua

机构信息

Department of Oral Implants, School of Stomatology, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.

出版信息

Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Feb;26(2):204-11. doi: 10.1111/clr.12317. Epub 2013 Dec 16.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term outcomes of ridge expansion technique in dealing with horizontal bony insufficiency of alveolar ridges for implant placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During the period 2004-2009, 168 patients with width insufficiency of alveolar ridges were treated using the ridge expansion technique to obtain an improved bony base for implant placement. Depending on the severity of width insufficiency, the surgical procedures were classified into two groups: ridge expansion alone (Group 1) and ridge expansion in combination with guided bone regeneration (Group 2). After 4-6 months of unloaded healing, the implants were restored. The patients were followed up until 2013 with clinical and radiographic examinations.

RESULTS

Among the 168 patients, 11 patients underwent a fracture of labial/buccal bony plate during surgery, which was corrected by changing the procedure into bone grafting, yielding a surgical failure rate of 6.5%. In the remaining 157 patients successfully treated by ridge expansion alone or in combination with GBR, 226 implants were simultaneously placed as planned. No implant failed over 2.8 years (6 months to 8 years) of follow-up, yielding a cumulative implant survival rate of 100% in each group. Six implants in Group 1 and 4 implants in Group 2, although osseointegrated and in function, did not fulfill success criteria: Cumulative implants' success rates were 93.2% in Group 1 and 95.6% in Group 2. The mean marginal bone losses during the first year in Group 1 and Group 2 were 0.69 and 0.43 mm, respectively, followed by an annual loss of ~ 0.06 and 0.07 mm, respectively, in the following years. No clinical parameter was abnormal. Twenty-two (10.4%) implants were exposed to peri-implant mucositis, whereas 19 (11.0%) implant-supported restorations were involved in prosthetic complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The preliminary results of this retrospective study indicate that ridge expansion alone or in combination with GBR can be considered an effective and safe procedure for treatment of width insufficiency of alveolar ridges on the purpose of implant application.

摘要

目的

评估牙槽嵴扩展技术在处理牙槽嵴水平骨量不足以进行种植体植入方面的长期效果。

材料与方法

在2004年至2009年期间,168例牙槽嵴宽度不足的患者采用牙槽嵴扩展技术治疗,以获得改善的骨基础用于种植体植入。根据宽度不足的严重程度,手术程序分为两组:单纯牙槽嵴扩展(第1组)和牙槽嵴扩展联合引导骨再生(第2组)。在4至6个月的无负载愈合后,进行种植体修复。对患者进行随访直至2013年,进行临床和影像学检查。

结果

在168例患者中,11例患者在手术期间发生唇侧/颊侧骨板骨折,通过将手术改为骨移植进行纠正,手术失败率为6.5%。在其余157例通过单纯牙槽嵴扩展或联合引导骨再生成功治疗的患者中,按计划同时植入226颗种植体。在2.8年(6个月至8年)的随访期间,没有种植体失败,每组的种植体累积存活率均为100%。第1组的6颗种植体和第2组的4颗种植体,尽管已骨结合且在行使功能,但未达到成功标准:第1组种植体的累积成功率为93.2%,第2组为95.6%。第1组和第2组在第一年的平均边缘骨吸收分别为0.69和0.43mm,随后在接下来的几年中每年分别约吸收0.06和0.07mm。没有临床参数异常。22颗(10.4%)种植体发生种植体周围黏膜炎,而19颗(11.0%)种植体支持的修复体出现修复并发症。

结论

这项回顾性研究的初步结果表明,单纯牙槽嵴扩展或联合引导骨再生可被视为一种有效且安全的方法,用于治疗牙槽嵴宽度不足以便进行种植体植入。

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