May K B, Lang B R, Lang B E, Wang R F
Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
J Prosthet Dent. 1998 Jun;79(6):648-57. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70071-x.
In implant prosthodontics an accurate fit of the framework to the supporting implants is paramount. However, microgaps occur, unknown to the clinician until complications arise that implicate errors in fit. Therefore prosthodontics would welcome a tool or instrument that provides an objective evaluation of the fit at the implant prosthodontic interface.
This clinical investigation determined whether a correlation existed between the laboratory laser measurement of the abutment analog-framework fit and the intraoral abutment-framework fit as measured by the Periotest method.
Fifteen subjects received implant-supported remote fixed partial denture supported by five (11 subjects) or six (4 subjects) implants in the mandibular jaw opposed by a complete maxillary denture. Laser videography was used to quantify the fit of the framework to its respective master cast with six measurements, while the fit of the framework in the mouth was quantified with the Periotest method. Data were statistically analyzed with correlation analyses and multiple regression.
The overall correlation coefficient between the two methods was r = 0.51. Regression analysis of variance revealed that the intercept of the laser videography measurement was significant (p < or = 0.05). The mean Periotest values and standard deviation for the abutment-framework interface were negative (-7.3 +/- 1.2). The variance in part for the Periotest values was explained by the misfits in the vertical axis (delta Z, +0.471) and in the misfit direction of the centroids in the x-y plane (X-YVD, -0.244).
There was no single variable among the six measurement variables that strongly correlated with the periotest method in the identification of mistfit at the bearing surface as indicated by the Periotest value measurements. The misfit laser variables that were weakly correlated to the Periotest values should be observable clinically with greater scrutiny.
在种植义齿修复中，修复体支架与种植体之间精确贴合至关重要。然而，微间隙会出现，在并发症出现提示贴合存在误差之前，临床医生对此并不知晓。因此，口腔修复学领域需要一种工具或仪器，能够对种植义齿界面的贴合情况进行客观评估。
本临床研究旨在确定通过实验室激光测量基台代型与修复体支架的贴合度，与通过Periotest方法测量的口内基台与修复体支架贴合度之间是否存在相关性。
15名受试者在下颌植入5颗（11名受试者）或6颗（4名受试者）种植体，用以支持种植体支持式远中固定局部义齿，对颌为全口上颌义齿。采用激光摄像技术对修复体支架与各自工作模型的贴合度进行6次测量，同时使用Periotest方法对口腔内修复体支架的贴合度进行量化。采用相关性分析和多元回归对数据进行统计学分析。
两种方法的总体相关系数为r = 0.51。方差回归分析显示，激光摄像测量的截距具有显著性（p≤0.05）。基台与修复体支架界面的Periotest平均值和标准差为负值（-7.3±1.2）。Periotest值的部分方差可由垂直轴上的不贴合（δZ，+0.471）和x-y平面质心的不贴合方向（X-YVD，-0.244）来解释。
在通过Periotest值测量确定支持面不贴合时，六个测量变量中没有一个与Periotest方法有强相关性。与Periotest值弱相关的不贴合激光变量在临床中应更仔细地观察。
