• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

三种不同牙槽嵴保存技术的有效性:一项初步随机对照试验

Effectiveness of three different alveolar ridge preservation techniques: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Avila-Ortiz Gustavo, Rodriguez Juan Carlos, Rudek Ivan, Benavides Erika, Rios Hector, Wang Hom-Lay

出版信息

Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2014 Jul-Aug;34(4):509-21. doi: 10.11607/prd.1838.

DOI:10.11607/prd.1838
PMID:25006768
Abstract

The aim of this pilot study was to obtain preliminary data regarding the effectiveness of three different alveolar ridge preservation modalities as compared with a control. Subjects in need of single-rooted tooth extraction were recruited and randomly allocated to one of four treatment groups: group 1 (control)--collagen plug; group 2--socket grafting and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) barrier; group 3--socket grafting, buccal overbuilding, and PTFE barrier; group 4--socket grafting, collagen barrier, and PTFE barrier. The grafting material used in all groups was an allograft. At 16 weeks, surgical reentry was performed, and a bone core biopsy was harvested for histomorphometric analysis. A cone beam computed tomography scan was obtained at baseline and before surgical reentry. Clinical (keratinized mucosa [KM] and buccolingual ridge width [RW] changes) and volumetric outcomes were statistically analyzed. A total of 20 patients were recruited (5 patients per group). KM and buccolingual RW changes were minimal during the 16-week healing period for all groups, with no statistically significant differences. Volumetric analyses revealed comparable alveolar ridge resorption values for groups 1, 2, and 4 (3%, 7%, and 5%, respectively), while group 3 exhibited more reduction (16%). Histomorphometric analysis revealed the presence of adequate average values of mineralized tissue (group 1, 46.4%; group 2, 28.88%; group 3, 48.81%; group 4, 41.13%). Based on the clinical and volumetric outcomes, none of the ridge preservation modalities was superior to the control. The combination allograft (freeze-dried bone allograft and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft) employed in this study appears to be a safe and adequate biomaterial for intraoral grafting.

摘要

本初步研究的目的是获取与对照组相比,三种不同牙槽嵴保存方式有效性的初步数据。招募需要拔除单根牙的受试者,并将其随机分配到四个治疗组之一:第1组(对照组)——胶原塞;第2组——牙槽窝植骨及聚四氟乙烯(PTFE)屏障膜;第3组——牙槽窝植骨、颊侧加高及PTFE屏障膜;第4组——牙槽窝植骨、胶原屏障膜及PTFE屏障膜。所有组使用的植骨材料均为同种异体骨。在16周时,进行再次手术入路,并采集骨芯活检标本进行组织形态计量学分析。在基线和再次手术入路前进行锥形束计算机断层扫描。对临床指标(角化黏膜[KM]和颊舌向牙槽嵴宽度[RW]变化)和体积测量结果进行统计学分析。共招募了20名患者(每组5名)。所有组在16周愈合期内KM和颊舌向RW变化均最小,无统计学显著差异。体积分析显示,第1组、第2组和第4组的牙槽嵴吸收值相当(分别为3%、7%和5%),而第3组吸收更多(16%)。组织形态计量学分析显示矿化组织平均值充足(第1组为46.4%;第2组为28.88%;第3组为48.81%;第4组为41.13%)。基于临床和体积测量结果,没有一种牙槽嵴保存方式优于对照组。本研究中使用的复合同种异体骨(冻干同种异体骨和脱矿冻干同种异体骨)似乎是一种安全且合适的口腔内植骨生物材料。

相似文献

1
Effectiveness of three different alveolar ridge preservation techniques: a pilot randomized controlled trial.三种不同牙槽嵴保存技术的有效性:一项初步随机对照试验
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2014 Jul-Aug;34(4):509-21. doi: 10.11607/prd.1838.
2
Histologic healing following tooth extraction with ridge preservation using mineralized versus combined mineralized-demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft: a randomized controlled clinical trial.使用矿化与矿化-脱矿冻干骨同种异体移植进行牙槽嵴保存的拔牙后组织学愈合:一项随机对照临床试验。
J Periodontol. 2015 Mar;86(3):348-55. doi: 10.1902/jop.2014.140483. Epub 2014 Nov 21.
3
Histologic comparison of healing after tooth extraction with ridge preservation using mineralized versus demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft.对比使用矿化冻干骨与脱矿冻干骨进行牙槽嵴保存术后拔牙创口愈合的组织学表现。
J Periodontol. 2012 Mar;83(3):329-36. doi: 10.1902/jop.2011.110270. Epub 2011 Jul 12.
4
Evaluation of poly lactic-co-glycolic acid-coated β-tricalcium phosphate for alveolar ridge preservation: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.聚乳酸-羟基乙酸共聚物涂层β-磷酸三钙用于牙槽嵴保存的评价:一项多中心随机对照试验。
J Periodontol. 2021 Apr;92(4):524-535. doi: 10.1002/JPER.20-0360. Epub 2020 Oct 12.
5
Clinical and histologic evaluation of bone-replacement grafts in the treatment of localized alveolar ridge defects. Part 1: Mineralized freeze-dried bone allograft.用于治疗局限性牙槽嵴缺损的骨替代移植物的临床和组织学评估。第1部分:矿化冻干同种异体骨。
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2003 Feb;23(1):29-35.
6
Healing at Molar Extraction Sites Using Freeze-Dried Bone Allograft and Collagen Wound Dressing: Case Series and Three-Arm Analyses.使用冻干骨移植物和胶原伤口敷料加速磨牙拔牙创愈合的临床研究:病例系列及三臂分析
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 Sep/Oct;34(5):1202-1212. doi: 10.11607/jomi.7243.
7
Xenograft versus extraction alone for ridge preservation after tooth removal: a clinical and histomorphometric study.异种移植与单纯拔牙后牙槽嵴保存:一项临床和组织形态计量学研究。
J Periodontol. 2008 Aug;79(8):1370-7. doi: 10.1902/jop.2008.070628.
8
Ridge preservation following tooth extraction using mineralized freeze-dried bone allograft compared to mineralized solvent-dehydrated bone allograft: A randomized controlled clinical trial.采用脱矿冻干骨和脱矿溶剂脱水骨进行拔牙后牙槽嵴保存的比较:一项随机对照临床试验。
J Periodontol. 2019 Feb;90(2):126-133. doi: 10.1002/JPER.18-0199. Epub 2018 Sep 19.
9
Labial soft tissue volume evaluation of different techniques for ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial.拔牙后不同牙槽嵴保存技术的唇侧软组织体积评估:一项随机对照临床试验
J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Jun;41(6):612-7. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12246. Epub 2014 Mar 26.
10
Histologic analysis of healing after tooth extraction with ridge preservation using mineralized human bone allograft.采用脱矿骨同种异体移植进行牙槽嵴保存拔牙后愈合的组织学分析。
J Periodontol. 2010 Dec;81(12):1765-72. doi: 10.1902/jop.2010.100286. Epub 2010 Jul 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study.脱蛋白牛骨矿物质覆盖胶原蛋白膜与纤维蛋白胶在牙槽嵴保存中放射学比较:一项回顾性研究。
BMC Oral Health. 2023 Nov 21;23(1):901. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03647-y.
2
Use of Injectable Platelet-Rich Fibrin Accompanied by Bone Graft in Socket Endurance: A Radiographic and Histological Study.注射用富血小板纤维蛋白联合骨移植用于牙槽窝保存的影像学和组织学研究
Cureus. 2023 Oct 12;15(10):e46909. doi: 10.7759/cureus.46909. eCollection 2023 Oct.
3
Dimensional and histomorphometric evaluation of biomaterials used for alveolar ridge preservation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
用于牙槽嵴保存的生物材料的尺寸和组织形态计量学评估:一项系统综述和网状荟萃分析。
Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Jan;26(1):141-158. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04248-1. Epub 2021 Nov 26.
4
Facial alveolar bone thickness and modifying factors of anterior maxillary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cone-beam computed tomography studies.面部牙槽骨厚度和上前牙的影响因素:锥形束 CT 研究的系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Oral Health. 2021 Mar 22;21(1):143. doi: 10.1186/s12903-021-01495-2.
5
Open healing of contained and non-contained extraction sockets covered with a ribose cross-linked collagen membrane: a pilot study.使用核糖交联胶原膜覆盖的封闭性和非封闭性拔牙创的开放愈合:一项前瞻性研究。
J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2020 Dec;50(6):406-417. doi: 10.5051/jpis.2000400020.
6
Extraction socket preservation using a collagen plug combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP): A comparative clinico-radiographic study.使用胶原塞联合富血小板血浆(PRP)进行拔牙窝保存:一项临床影像学对比研究。
J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2020 Spring;14(2):139-145. doi: 10.34172/joddd.2020.028. Epub 2020 Jun 17.
7
The Use of a Non-Absorbable Membrane as an Occlusive Barrier for Alveolar Ridge Preservation: A One Year Follow-Up Prospective Cohort Study.使用不可吸收膜作为牙槽嵴保存的封闭屏障:一项为期一年的随访前瞻性队列研究。
Antibiotics (Basel). 2020 Mar 3;9(3):110. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics9030110.
8
Effectiveness of buccal pouch grafting in minimizing loss of alveolar dimension: A canine investigation.颊袋移植术在最小化牙槽嵴尺寸丧失方面的有效性:一项犬类研究。
Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2019 Sep 5;16(5):338-345. eCollection 2019 Sep-Oct.