Suppr超能文献

美国腭裂项目:两个中心采用标准化移植物评估量表对短期和长期二期牙槽骨移植结果的比较

The Americleft Project: A Comparison of Short- and Longer-Term Secondary Alveolar Bone Graft Outcomes in Two Centers Using the Standardized Way to Assess Grafts Scale.

作者信息

Ruppel J K, Long R E, Oliver D R, Semb G, Russell K A, Mercado A M, Daskalogiannakis J, Hathaway R R

出版信息

Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016 Sep;53(5):508-15. doi: 10.1597/15-030. Epub 2015 Jul 28.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare length of follow-up and cleft site dental management on bone graft ratings from two centers.

DESIGN

Blind retrospective analysis of cleft site radiographs and chart reviews for determination of cleft-site lateral incisor management.

PATIENTS

A total of 78 consecutively grafted patients with complete clefts from two major cleft/craniofacial centers (43 from Center 1 and 35 from Center 2).

INTERVENTIONS

Secondary iliac crest alveolar bone grafting, at a mean age of 9 years 9 months (Center 1: 9 years 7 months; Center 2: 10 years 0 month).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The Americleft Standardized Way to Assess Grafts scale from 0 (failed graft) to 6 (ideal) was used to rate graft outcome at two time points (T1, T2). Average T1 was 11 years 1 month of age, 1 year 3 months postgraft. Average T2 was 17 years 11 months of age, 8 years 0 months postgraft. Six trained and calibrated raters scored each radiograph twice. Reliability was calculated at T1 and T2 using weighted kappa. A paired Wilcoxon signed rank test (P < .05) tested T1 and T2 differences for each center. A Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine the significance of differences between centers at T1 and T2. Correlation tested whether T1 ratings predicted T2. Linear regression determined possible factors that might contribute to graft rating changes over time.

RESULTS

Reliability was good at T1 and T2 (interrater = .713 and .701, respectively; intrarater = .790 and .805, respectively). Center 1 scores were significantly better than those from Center 2 at both T1 (5.21 versus 3.29) and T2 (5.18 versus 3.44). There was no statistical difference between T1 and T2 scores for either center; although, there was a greater chance of bone graft score improving with completion of canine eruption and substitution for missing lateral incisors.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term ratings of graft outcomes identified significant differences between centers that persisted over time. Dental cleft-site management influenced final graft outcome.

摘要

目的

比较两个中心在骨移植评级方面的随访时间和腭裂部位牙齿处理情况。

设计

对腭裂部位X光片进行盲法回顾性分析,并查阅病历以确定腭裂部位侧切牙的处理情况。

患者

来自两个主要腭裂/颅面中心的78例连续接受移植的完全性腭裂患者(中心1有43例,中心2有35例)。

干预措施

平均年龄9岁9个月时进行二次髂嵴牙槽骨移植(中心1:9岁7个月;中心2:10岁0个月)。

主要观察指标

采用美国腭裂协会评估移植的标准化方法,从0(移植失败)到6(理想)对两个时间点(T1、T2)的移植结果进行评分。T1平均年龄为11岁1个月,移植后1年3个月。T2平均年龄为17岁11个月,移植后8年0个月。6名经过培训且校准的评估者对每张X光片进行两次评分。使用加权kappa在T1和T2时计算可靠性。采用配对Wilcoxon符号秩检验(P < 0.05)检验每个中心T1和T2的差异。使用Kruskal-Wallis检验确定T1和T2时中心间差异的显著性。相关性检验T1评分是否能预测T2。线性回归确定可能导致移植评分随时间变化的因素。

结果

T1和T2时可靠性良好(评估者间分别为0.713和0.701;评估者内分别为0.790和0.805)。在T1(5.21对3.29)和T2(5.18对3.44)时,中心1的评分均显著高于中心2。两个中心的T1和T2评分之间均无统计学差异;不过,随着尖牙萌出完成和缺失侧切牙被替代,骨移植评分改善的可能性更大。

结论

移植结果的短期评级显示,各中心之间存在显著差异,且这种差异随时间持续存在。腭裂部位的牙齿处理会影响最终的移植结果。

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