Suppr超能文献

边缘骨丧失与全弓固定螺丝固位种植体支持式修复体和固定套筒固位种植体支持式修复体的风险指标:一项回顾性病例对照研究。

Marginal bone loss and the risk indicators of fixed screw-retained implant-supported prostheses and fixed telescopic-retained implant-supported prostheses in full arch: A retrospective case-control study.

机构信息

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Implantology, Tokyo Dental College, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Jul;32(7):818-827. doi: 10.1111/clr.13750. Epub 2021 Apr 7.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study compared full-arch screw-retained implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FSI-FDPs) and full-arch telescopic-retained implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with a professional retrieval system (FTI-FDPs) on marginal bone loss (MBL), the risk indicators and peri-implantitis rate after 7-13 years.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty five edentulous patients were treated with 86 prostheses and 592 implants. The FSI-FDP group comprised 26 patients (32 prostheses, 202 implants), and the FTI-FDP group comprised 39 patients (54 prostheses, 390 implants). MBL and the risk indicators of MBL ≥1 mm were assessed. Peri-implantitis rates at 13 years were also calculated.

RESULTS

Full-arch screw-retained implant-supported fixed dental prostheses and FTI-FDP implants exhibited comparable mean MBLs of 0.60 ± 0.51 and 0.41 ± 1.03 mm, respectively. MBL ≥1 mm was noted for 25% of FSI-FDP implants and 6.9% of FTI-FDP implants. Superstructure-abutment connection (screw retention:FSI-FDPs >telescopic retention:FTI-FDPs) and implant-abutment connection (External butt joint, Internal butt joint >Morse taper joint) were associated with MBL ≥1 mm. Peri-implantitis rates at the implant level were 3.99% (95%CI = 3.93-20.5) in FSI-FDP group and 3.85% (95%CI = 3.85-34.3) in FTI-FDP group with no significance.

CONCLUSIONS

It was concluded that FSI-FDP and FTI-FDP implants exhibited comparable MBL; however, the risk of MBL ≥1 mm in FTI-FDPs was lower than in FSI-FDPs. Besides, implant-abutment connection was the risk indicator of MBL ≥1 mm. In peri-implantitis rate, FSI-FDPs and FTI-FDPs behave similarly.

摘要

目的

本研究比较了全颌螺钉固位种植体支持的固定义齿(FSI-FDPs)和全颌套筒固位种植体支持的固定义齿(FTI-FDPs)在 7-13 年后的边缘骨丧失(MBL)、MBL 风险指标和种植体周围炎的发生率。

材料与方法

65 名无牙颌患者共接受 86 个修复体和 592 个种植体治疗。FSI-FDP 组包括 26 名患者(32 个修复体,202 个种植体),FTI-FDP 组包括 39 名患者(54 个修复体,390 个种植体)。评估了 MBL 和 MBL≥1mm 的风险指标。还计算了 13 年后种植体周围炎的发生率。

结果

全颌螺钉固位种植体支持的固定义齿和 FTI-FDP 种植体的平均 MBL 分别为 0.60±0.51mm 和 0.41±1.03mm。FSI-FDP 种植体的 MBL≥1mm 发生率为 25%,FTI-FDP 种植体的 MBL≥1mm 发生率为 6.9%。上部结构-基台连接(螺钉固位:FSI-FDPs>套筒固位:FTI-FDPs)和种植体-基台连接(外接头、内接头>Morse 锥度接头)与 MBL≥1mm 有关。FSI-FDP 组种植体水平的种植体周围炎发生率为 3.99%(95%CI=3.93-20.5),FTI-FDP 组为 3.85%(95%CI=3.85-34.3),无显著性差异。

结论

FSI-FDP 和 FTI-FDP 种植体的 MBL 无显著差异,但 FTI-FDP 种植体 MBL≥1mm 的风险低于 FSI-FDP 种植体。此外,种植体-基台连接是 MBL≥1mm 的风险指标。在种植体周围炎发生率方面,FSI-FDP 和 FTI-FDP 表现相似。

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