Suppr超能文献

带瓣与无瓣牙槽嵴保存:一项临床和组织学单盲随机对照试验。

Flap versus flapless alveolar ridge preservation: A clinical and histological single-blinded, randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Siu Trever L, Dukka Himabindu, Saleh Muhammad H A, Tattan Mustafa, Dib Ziad, Ravidà Andrea, Greenwell Henry, Wang Hom-Lay, Araujo Mauricio G

机构信息

Midwestern University Clinics, Glendale, Arizona, USA.

Private Practice, Avondale, Arizona, USA.

出版信息

J Periodontol. 2023 Feb;94(2):184-192. doi: 10.1002/JPER.22-0213. Epub 2022 Nov 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to compare a flapless technique of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) to a flap technique to determine if preserving the periosteal blood supply would limit loss of crestal ridge width and height.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients were randomly assigned to receive ARP using either a flapless or flap technique. Sockets were grafted with demineralized bone matrix and mineralized particulate allograft then covered with a barrier in both groups. Re-entry was performed at 4 months to obtain samples for histological analysis and subsequent implant placement.

RESULTS

Ridge width of the flapless group at the crest decreased from 8.3 ± 1.3 mm to 7.0 ± 1.9 mm for a mean loss of 1.3 ± 0.9 mm (p < 0.05), whereas the flap group decreased from 8.5 ± 1.5 mm to 7.5 ± 1.5 mm for a mean loss of 1.0 ± 1.1 mm (p < 0.05). The mean midbuccal vertical change for the flap group was a loss of 0.9 ± 1.3 mm (p < 0.05) versus 0.5 ± 0.9 mm (p < 0.05) for the flapless group. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Histologically, flapless ARP revealed more vital mineralized tissue (44 ± 10%) compared to the flap group (p>0.05). In the flapless group, the occlusal soft tissue was significantly thicker than in the flap group at the 4-month re-entry (p< 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Crestal ridge width, height, and percentage of vital mineralized bone following treatment with a flapless ARP technique, was not significantly different from a flap technique.

摘要

背景

本随机临床试验的目的是比较无瓣牙槽嵴保存(ARP)技术与翻瓣技术,以确定保留骨膜血供是否会限制嵴顶宽度和高度的丧失。

方法

24例患者被随机分配接受使用无瓣或翻瓣技术的ARP。两组牙槽窝均植入脱矿骨基质和矿化颗粒异体骨,然后覆盖屏障膜。4个月时进行再次切开以获取样本进行组织学分析及随后的种植体植入。

结果

无瓣组嵴顶宽度从8.3±1.3mm降至7.0±1.9mm,平均丧失1.3±0.9mm(p<0.05),而翻瓣组从8.5±1.5mm降至7.5±1.5mm,平均丧失1.0±1.1mm(p<0.05)。翻瓣组颊侧中部垂直方向的平均变化为丧失0.9±1.3mm(p<0.05),无瓣组为0.5±0.9mm(p<0.05)。两组间无统计学显著差异。组织学上,与翻瓣组相比,无瓣ARP显示更多有活力的矿化组织(44±10%)(p>0.05)。在无瓣组,4个月再次切开时咬合面软组织明显比翻瓣组厚(p<0.05)。

结论

采用无瓣ARP技术治疗后,嵴顶宽度、高度和有活力矿化骨的百分比与翻瓣技术相比无显著差异。

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