Zhang Shuo, Wang Yanying, Wang Qingfu, Li Jinmeng, Wang Feifan, Li Zhaoyang, Cui Jianlin, Zhang Jian
Department of Oral Implantology, Tianjin Stomatological Hospital, School of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin Key Laboratory of Oral and Maxillofacial Function Reconstruction, Tianjin, China.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024 Dec;26(6):1354-1365. doi: 10.1111/cid.13393. Epub 2024 Sep 30.
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of different collagen membran fixation protocols on the volume stability in horizontal ridge augmentation in the aesthetic area.
A total of 48 patients with 65 augmented sites were included in this study. Implants were placed in the aesthetic region, and simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) surgery was performed for horizontal ridge augmentation. Participants were divided into four groups, each comprising 12 patients, based on different absorbable collagen membrane fixation protocols. Group 1: without fixation; Group 2: fixation with absorbable sutures; Group 3: fixation with titanium pins; Group 4: fixation with titanium pins and absorbable sutures. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed immediately after surgery and at 6 months post-surgery, respectively. The horizontal thickness of the augmented region was analyzed for volume stability at the implant shoulder (H0) and 1-5 mm apical to the implant shoulder (H1-H5). Changes in labial thickness during bone healing were calculated as absolute values (mm) and relative values (%).
After 6 months of bone healing, horizontal thickness was significantly reduced at all levels (H0-H5) in all groups compared to immediate post-surgery results (p < 0.05). At H1-H5, horizontal bone loss in group 1 was significantly higher than in the other three groups (p < 0.05). Group 4 exhibited significantly less horizontal bone loss compared to group 2 at H0-H2 (p < 0.05) and group 4 compared to group 3 at H0-H1 (p < 0.05). No significant difference in horizontal bone loss between groups 2 and 3 was detected at H0-H5 (p > 0.05).
Guided bone regeneration in the aesthetic area with additional membrane fixation demonstrated superior volume stability of the augmented region compared to cases without fixation. There was no significant difference in bone volume stability between membrane fixation with titanium pins and fixation with absorbable sutures. However, the combined use of pins and absorbable sutures yielded superior volume stability.
本研究旨在评估不同胶原膜固定方案对美学区域水平嵴增量中体积稳定性的影响。
本研究共纳入48例患者,共65个增量部位。将种植体植入美学区域,并同时进行引导骨再生(GBR)手术以进行水平嵴增量。根据不同的可吸收胶原膜固定方案,将参与者分为四组,每组12例患者。第1组:不固定;第2组:用可吸收缝线固定;第3组:用钛钉固定;第4组:用钛钉和可吸收缝线固定。分别在术后即刻和术后6个月进行锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)。分析种植体肩部(H0)以及种植体肩部根尖方向1 - 5毫米处(H1 - H5)增量区域的水平厚度,以评估体积稳定性。计算骨愈合过程中唇侧厚度的变化,以绝对值(毫米)和相对值(%)表示。
骨愈合6个月后,与术后即刻结果相比,所有组在所有水平(H0 - H5)的水平厚度均显著降低(p < 0.05)。在H1 - H5水平,第1组的水平骨吸收明显高于其他三组(p < 0.05)。在H0 - H2水平,第4组的水平骨吸收明显少于第2组(p < 0.05);在H0 - H1水平,第4组的水平骨吸收明显少于第3组(p < 0.05)。在H0 - H5水平,未检测到第2组和第3组之间水平骨吸收的显著差异(p > 0.05)。
与未固定的情况相比,美学区域采用引导骨再生并附加膜固定可使增量区域具有更好的体积稳定性。钛钉膜固定和可吸收缝线固定在骨体积稳定性方面无显著差异。然而,联合使用钛钉和可吸收缝线可产生更好的体积稳定性。