改良盾构术与传统即刻种植术的临床效果对比研究

doi:10.7518/hxkq.2019.05.007

华西口腔医学杂志 ›› 2019, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (5): 490-495.doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2019.05.007

改良盾构术与传统即刻种植术的临床效果对比研究

许亚梅,黄弘,王黎,吴庆庆,付钢,李姣()

重庆医科大学附属口腔医院种植科口腔疾病与生物医学重庆市重点实验室重庆市高校市级口腔生物医学工程重点实验室,重庆 401147

收稿日期:2019-04-30 修回日期:2019-07-25 出版日期:2019-10-01 发布日期:2019-10-15
通讯作者: 李姣 E-mail:lijiao@hospital.cqmu.edu.cn
作者简介:许亚梅,硕士,E-mail：992407587@qq.com
基金资助:
重庆市医学科研计划(2012-2-140);2016年重庆市高校创新团队建设计划(CXTDG201602006);重庆市高校市级口腔生物医学工程重点实验室资助项目[渝教科（2014）55号]

Comparison of clinical effects of a modified socket shield technique and the conventional immediate implant placement

Xu Yamei,Huang Hong,Wang Li,Wu Qingqing,Fu Gang,Li Jiao()

Dept. of Implant Dentistry, Stomatological Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and Biomedical Sciences, Chongqing Municipal Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Engineering of Higher Education, Chongqing 401147, China

Received:2019-04-30 Revised:2019-07-25 Online:2019-10-01 Published:2019-10-15
Contact: Jiao Li E-mail:lijiao@hospital.cqmu.edu.cn
Supported by:
Chongqing Medical Research Project(2012-2-140);Program for Innovation Team Building at Institutions of Higher Education in Chongqing in 2016(CXTDG201602006);Project Supported by Chongqing Municipal Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Engineering of [Higher Education (2014)55]

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的对比研究美学区改良盾构术与传统即刻种植术的临床效果。方法选取24例行上颌前牙区单颗牙即刻种植的患者,12例行改良盾构术（试验组）,12例行传统即刻种植术（对照组）,随访1年,比较两组患者的种植成功率、红色美学指数（PES）、唇侧骨板吸收量以及患者满意度。采用SPSS 21.0软件进行统计学分析。结果术后1年,两组患者的种植成功率均为100%;试验组PES评分以及患者满意度均高于对照组,唇侧骨板吸收量低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论改良盾构术有利于维持唇侧骨量,从而获得更好的软组织美学效果。

关键词: 即刻种植, 盾构术, 美学区, 唇侧骨板, 美学效果

Abstract:

Objective To compare the clinical effects of a modified socket shield technique (SST) and the conventional immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone. Methods Twenty-four patients with one hopeless upper incisor were conse-cutively enrolled in this study. All patients were scheduled for immediate implant placement. Twelve patients under-went a modified SST (experimental group) whereas the others underwent conventional procedures (control group). Radiogra-phic and clinical data were obtained preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and 12 months after surgery. The success rate of the implants, the pink esthetic score (PES) and patient satisfaction were analyzed. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS 21.0 software. Results One year after operation, the success rate of the implants was 100% in both groups. The PES and patient satisfaction of the experimental group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.05). The buccal bone plate resorbed less in the experimental group than in the control group (P<0.05). Conclusion The modified SST is advantageous over the conventional immediate implant placement in terms of buccal bone and soft tissue maintenance.

Key words: immediate implant placement, socket shield technique, esthetic zone, buccal bone plate, esthetic outcomes

中图分类号:

R783

许亚梅,黄弘,王黎,吴庆庆,付钢,李姣. 改良盾构术与传统即刻种植术的临床效果对比研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2019, 37(5): 490-495.

Xu Yamei,Huang Hong,Wang Li,Wu Qingqing,Fu Gang,Li Jiao. Comparison of clinical effects of a modified socket shield technique and the conventional immediate implant placement[J]. West China Journal of Stomatology, 2019, 37(5): 490-495.

图/表 7

图 1

图 2

图 3

表 1

图 4

表 2

表 3

参考文献 22

[1]	Bhola M, Neely AL, Kolhatkar S . Immediate implant placement: clinical decisions, advantages, and disadvantages[J]. J Prosthodont, 2008,17(7):576-581.
[2]	Roe P, Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K , et al. Horizontal and vertical dimensional changes of peri-implant facial bone following immediate placement and provisionalization of maxillary anterior single implants: a 1-year cone beam computed tomography study[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2012,27(2):393-400.
[3]	Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J . Hard-tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sites[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2004,31(10):820-828.
[4]	Nisapakultorn K, Suphanantachat S, Silkosessak O , et al. Factors affecting soft tissue level around anterior maxillary single-tooth implants[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2010,21(6):662-670.
[5]	Hürzeler MB, Zuhr O, Schupbach P , et al. The socket-shield technique: a proof-of-principle report[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2010,37(9):855-862.
[6]	Bäumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S , et al. The socket-shield technique: first histological, clinical, and volumetrical observations after separation of the buccal tooth segment—a pilot study[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2015,17(1):71-82.
[7]	Siormpas KD, Mitsias ME, Kontsiotou-Siormpa E , et al. Immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone utilizing the “root-membrane” technique: clinical results up to 5 years postloading[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014,29(6):1397-1405.
[8]	Bäumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S , et al. Socket shield technique for immediate implant placement—clinical, radiographic and volumetric data after 5 years[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2017,28(11):1450-1458.
[9]	Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P , et al. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1986,1(1):11-25.
[10]	Fürhauser R, Florescu D, Benesch T , et al. Evaluation of soft tissue around single-tooth implant crowns: the pink esthetic score[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2010,16(6):639-644.
[11]	Chen ST, Wilson TG Jr, Hämmerle CH . Immediate or early placement of implants following tooth extraction: review of biologic basis, clinical procedures, and outcomes[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2004,19(Suppl):12-25.
[12]	Atieh MA, Payne AG, Duncan WJ , et al. Immediate placement or immediate restoration/loading of single implants for molar tooth replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2010,25(2):401-415.
[13]	Grandi T, Guazzi P, Samarani R , et al. Immediate provisionalisation of single post-extractive implants versus implants placed in healed sites in the anterior maxilla: 1-year results from a multicentre controlled cohort study[J]. Eur J Oral Implantol, 2013,6(3):285-295.
[14]	Huynh-Ba G, Pjetursson BE, Sanz M , et al. Analysis of the socket bone wall dimensions in the upper maxilla in relation to immediate implant placement[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2010,21(1):37-42.
[15]	Lee CT, Chiu TS, Chuang SK , et al. Alterations of the bone dimension following immediate implant placement into extraction socket: systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2014,41(9):914-926.
[16]	Chen ST, Buser D . Esthetic outcomes following immediate and early implant placement in the anterior maxilla: a systematic review[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014,29(Suppl):186-215.
[17]	Lagas LJ, Pepplinkhuizen JJ, Bergé SJ , et al. Implant placement in the aesthetic zone: the socket-shield-technique[J]. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd, 2015,122(1):33-36.
[18]	Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K . Proximal socket shield for interimplant papilla preservation in the esthetic zone[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2013,33(1):e24-e31.
[19]	Cherel F, Etienne D . Papilla preservation between two implants: a modified socket-shield technique to maintain the scalloped anatomy? A case report[J]. Quintessence Int, 2014,45(1):23-30.
[20]	Morton D, Chen ST, Martin WC , et al. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding optimizing esthetic outcomes in implant dentistry[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014,29(Suppl):216-220.
[21]	沈建伟, 何福明, 江巧红 , 等. 上颌前牙与前磨牙唇侧骨壁厚度的CBCT测量分析[J]. 浙江大学学报(医学版), 2012,41(3):234-238.
	Shen JW, He FM, Jiang QH , et al. Measurement of facial bone wall thickness of maxillary anterior teeth and premolars on cone beam computed tomography images[J]. J Zhejiang Univ (Med Sci), 2012,41(3):234-238.
[22]	蒙萌, 陶荣, 夏雨凝 , 等. 中西部人群健康上颌前牙唇侧骨板厚度的CBCT测量[J]. 牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志, 2018,28(2):73-77, 102.
	Meng M, Tao R, Xia YN , et al. Facial alveolar bone thickness of maxillary anterior teeth in the subjects from central and west China with normal occlusion measured by CBCT[J]. Chin J Conserv Dent, 2018,28(2):73-77, 102.

组别	例数	T0	T2	T2-T0
试验组	12	13.17±0.83	13.25±0.75	0.08±1.08
对照组	12	13.08±0.79	11.83±0.94	-1.25±1.22
P值	-	0.782	0.001*	0.015*

组别	1 mm-IS		P值	3 mm-IS		P值	5 mm-IS		P值
组别	T1	T2	P值	T1	T2	P值	T1	T2	P值
试验组	2.94±0.68	2.90±0.64	0.256	3.00±0.76	2.94±0.71	0.179	2.84±0.64	2.73±0.57	0.185
对照组	3.35±0.64	2.51±0.69	0.000*	3.08±0.66	2.33±0.78	0.002*	2.78±0.67	2.13±0.72	0.005*

组别	例数		T1-T2
组别	例数	1 mm-IS	3 mm-IS	5 mm-IS
试验组	12	0.04±0.13	0.05±0.13	0.11±0.26
对照组	12	0.85±0.45	0.75±0.37	0.65±0.35
P值	-	0.000*	0.000*	0.005*

改良盾构术与传统即刻种植术的临床效果对比研究

Comparison of clinical effects of a modified socket shield technique and the conventional immediate implant placement

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 22

相关文章 13

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	刘峰, 詹雅琳, 刘欣然. 美学区天然基牙二次冠修复中预备体不良边缘的处理策略[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2023, 41(6): 641-646.
[2]	张邃, 孙毅, 黄长波, 何东宁. 上前牙即刻种植即刻修复术后软组织变化与不同跳跃间隙的相关性[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2023, 41(6): 678-685.
[3]	刘雨婷, 袁泉. 美学区种植体植入轴向的影响因素及临床决策[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2023, 41(5): 512-520.
[4]	任碧晖, 郭水根, 徐业豪, 戴婕婷, 魏洪武. 单纯锥度固位种植体应用于后牙区即刻种植5~7年的临床疗效[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2023, 41(3): 341-349.
[5]	闫圣杰,周聪,刘金,许香娜,杨云,陈鑫,兰晶. 上颌前牙区应用根膜技术即刻种植的临床效果观察[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2019, 37(6): 615-620.
[6]	韩扬,李晓光,朱洁,李菁雯,胡苏宁,李聪,赵晶,梁宇红. 采用锥形束CT测量健康上前牙唇侧骨板形态及牙长轴倾角的变化[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2019, 37(4): 412-416.
[7]	刘金,蒲必双,夏玉兰,王成泽,王罡,兰晶. 上颌前牙倾斜角度对种植治疗设计的影响[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2016, 34(6): 611-616.
[8]	毛秋华徐普王彬娉陆丽英郁豆王秀丽. 种植体颈部裂开致即刻种植即刻负重修复失败1例[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2014, 32(4): 420-421.
[9]	梁晋姜宝岐兰晶黄海云朱震坤文勇马晓妮徐欣 . 环状植骨术同期牙种植临床效果的短期观察[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2014, 32(1): 40-44.
[10]	费伟杨小民李铮尹明平沈志浩廖楚航. 可吸收性胶原膜引导即刻植入种植体周围骨组织再生的实验研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2008, 26(05): 494-498.
[11]	班宇;宫苹;王少安;刘晓光;耿宁;袁泉. 渐进性负荷对即刻植入种植体早期骨性结合的影响[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2006, 24(03): 210-213.
[12]	唐　倩1,梁　星2,黄　兰3,张庆鸿2. 种植义齿修复牙列缺损的牙龈美学效果评价[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2004, 22(04): 295-297.
[13]	卢丙仑,刘宝林,陈小文,洪咏龙,郭庆科. 即刻种植动物模型的建立及意义[J]. , 1997, 15(04): 0-.