Suppr超能文献

随机对照多中心研究比较了短种植体(6 毫米)和长种植体(11-15 毫米)与鼻窦提升术相结合的效果。第 1 部分:加载 1 年后的人口统计学和患者报告结果。

Randomized controlled multicentre study comparing short dental implants (6 mm) versus longer dental implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures. Part 1: demographics and patient-reported outcomes at 1 year of loading.

机构信息

Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

出版信息

J Clin Periodontol. 2015 Jan;42(1):72-80. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12323. Epub 2014 Dec 26.

Abstract

AIM

To test whether or not the use of short dental implants (6 mm) results in an implant survival rate similar to long implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus grafting.

METHODS

This multicentre study enrolled 101 patients with a posterior maxillary bone height of 5-7 mm. Patients randomly received short implants (6 mm) (group short) or long implants (11-15 mm) with sinus grafting (group graft). Six months later, implants were loaded with single crowns and patients re-examined at 1 year of loading. Outcomes included treatment time, price calculations, safety, patient-reported outcome measures (OHIP-49 = Oral Health Impact Profile) and implant survival. Statistical analysis was performed using a non-parametric approach.

RESULTS

In 101 patients, 137 implants were placed. Mean surgical time was 52.6 min. (group short) and 74.6 min. (group graft). Mean costs amounted to 941EUR (group short) and 1946EUR (group graft). Mean severity scores between suture removal and baseline revealed a statistically significant decrease for most OHIP dimensions in group graft only. At 1 year, 97 patients with 132 implants were re-examined. The implant survival rate was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Both treatment modalities can be considered suitable for implant therapy in the atrophied posterior maxilla. Short implants may be more favourable regarding short-term patient morbidity, treatment time and price.

摘要

目的

检验在接受窦底增高术时使用短种植体(6mm)是否与使用长种植体(11-15mm)的种植体存活率相当。

方法

这项多中心研究纳入了 101 名上颌后牙区牙槽骨高度为 5-7mm 的患者。患者被随机分为两组,分别接受短种植体(6mm)(短种植体组)或长种植体(11-15mm)联合窦底增高术(窦底增高组)。6 个月后,将种植体负载单冠,在负载后 1 年对患者进行复查。研究结果包括治疗时间、价格计算、安全性、患者报告的结局测量(OHIP-49=口腔健康影响程度量表)和种植体存活率。采用非参数方法进行统计分析。

结果

在 101 名患者中,共植入了 137 枚种植体。平均手术时间为 52.6 分钟(短种植体组)和 74.6 分钟(窦底增高组)。平均费用分别为 941 欧元(短种植体组)和 1946 欧元(窦底增高组)。仅在窦底增高组中,从拆线到基线的大多数 OHIP 维度的平均严重程度评分显示出统计学上的显著下降。在 1 年的随访中,97 名患者中有 132 枚种植体被复查。种植体的存活率为 100%。

结论

两种治疗方法均可被认为适用于萎缩上颌后牙区的种植治疗。短种植体在短期患者发病率、治疗时间和价格方面可能更具优势。

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