个性化牙龈成型器在不同牙龈生物型及角化龈宽度患者上颌单颗前牙种植中的应用效果

doi:10.19438/j.cjoms.2024.04.010

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的: 探讨个性化牙龈成型器在不同牙龈生物型及角化龈宽度患者上颌单颗前牙种植中的应用效果。方法: 选择2022年1月—2023年5月绍兴市口腔医院收治的行上颌单颗前牙种植修复的患者85例,按角化龈宽度和牙龈生物型分为4组,角化龈宽度不足和厚龈型组（角化龈宽度<2 cm,n=17）、角化龈宽度不足和薄龈型组（n=13）、角化龈宽度充足和厚龈型组（角化龈宽度≥2 cm,n=26）、角化龈宽度充足和薄龈型组（n=29）。所有患者均接受个性化牙龈成型器种植。比较不同角化龈宽度与牙龈生物型对种植体周围骨组织、软组织美学效果、龈乳头美学效果、软组织愈合程度及美学效果满意度的影响。采用SPSS 23.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果: 术后当天、永久修复完成时、永久修复完成6个月后,在相同牙龈生物型条件下,角化龈宽度<2 mm的患者骨吸收量显著大于角化龈宽度≥2 mm的患者（P<0.05）。在相同角化龈宽度下,厚龈型与薄龈型患者骨吸收量比较无统计学差异（P>0.05）。永久修复完成时、永久修复完成6个月后,在相同牙龈生物型条件下,角化龈宽度≥2 mm的患者红色美学指数（PES）评分、龈乳头充填指数（PFI）评分、视觉模拟评分法（VAS）评分显著高于角化龈宽度<2 mm的患者（P<0.05）。在相同角化龈宽度条件下,厚龈型患者PES评分、PFI评分、VAS评分显著高于薄龈型患者（P<0.05）。术后3 d和术后7 d,在相同牙龈生物型条件下,角化龈宽度≥2 mm的患者黏膜肿胀度评分显著低于角化龈宽度<2 mm的患者（P<0.05）。在相同角化龈宽度下,厚龈型患者黏膜肿胀度评分显著低于薄龈型患者（P<0.05）。结论: 种植体周围骨组织健康与角化龈宽度密切相关,牙龈生物型对种植体周围骨组织吸收影响较小。角化龈宽度充足且厚龈型患者软组织健康、龈乳头美学效果、软组织愈合程度及美学效果满意度更佳。

关键词: 个性化牙龈成型器, 牙龈生物型, 角化龈宽度, 种植体, 龈乳头美学

Abstract: PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of personalized gingival formers on bone and soft tissue health and gingival papillae aesthetics around maxillary single anterior dental implants in different gingival biotypes and keratinized gingival widths. METHODS: A total of 85 patients who underwent maxillary single anterior tooth implant restoration in Shaoxing Stomatological Hospital from January 2022 to May 2023 were selected and divided into 4 groups according to keratinized gingival width and gingival biotype: insufficient keratinized gingival width and thick gingival type (keratinized gingival width <2 cm, n=17), insufficient keratinized gingival width and thin gingival type(n=13), sufficient keratinized gingival width and thick gingival type(keratinized gingival width ≥2 cm, n=26), sufficient keratinized gingival width and thin gingival type(n=29). All patients received personalized gingival implants. The effects of different keratinized gingival width and gingival biotype on bone tissue, soft tissue aesthetic effect, gingival papilla aesthetic effect, soft tissue healing degree and satisfaction of aesthetic effect were compared. SPSS 23.0 software package was used for data analysis. RESULTS: On the day after surgery, at the completion of permanent repair, and 6 months after the completion of permanent repair, the bone resorption in patients with keratinized gingiva width <2 mm was significantly higher than patients with keratinized gingival width ≥2 mm under the same gingival biological types(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in bone resorption between patients with thick gingival width and patients with thin gingival width under the same keratinized gingival width (P>0.05). At the completion of permanent repair and 6 months after the completion of permanent repair, the pink esthetic scores(PES), gingival papilae filling index (PFI) score and visual simulation score (VAS) of esthetics from patients with keratinized gingival width ≥2 mm were significantly higher than patients with keratinized gingival width <2 mm(P<0.05) under the same gingival biological types. The scores of PES, PFI and VAS in patients with thick gingival type were significantly higher than those in patients with thin gingival type(P<0.05). At 3 and 7 days after surgery, the mucosal swelling score of patients with keratinized gingival width ≥2 mm was significantly lower than that of patients with keratinized gingival width < 2 mm under the same gingival biological types(P<0.05). When the keratinized gingival width ≥2 mm, the mucosal swelling score of patients with thick gingival type was significantly lower than that of patients with thin gingival type 7 days after surgery(P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The bone health around the implant is closely related to the keratinized gingival width, and the gingival biotype has little effect on bone resorption around the implant. Patients with full keratinized gingival width and thick gingival type had better satisfaction with soft tissue health, gingival papillae aesthetics, soft tissue healing degree and final aesthetics.

Key words: Personalized gum shaper, Gingival biological type, Keratinized gum width, Implants, Gingival papillary aesthetics

中图分类号:

R782.1

裘实, 罗畅, 蔡安庆, 王小菲, 朱挺. 个性化牙龈成型器在不同牙龈生物型及角化龈宽度患者上颌单颗前牙种植中的应用效果[J]. 中国口腔颌面外科杂志, 2024, 22(4): 378-384.

QIU Shi, LUO Chang, CAI An-qing, WANG Xiao-fei, ZHU Ting. Application of personalized gingival molding device in maxillary single anterior tooth implantation in patients with different gingival biotypes and keratinized gingival widths[J]. China J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2024, 22(4): 378-384.

参考文献

[1] Darby I.Risk factors for periodontitis & peri-implantitis[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2022, 90(1): 9-12.
[2] Kadkhodazadeh M, Amid R, Moscowchi A.Effect of soft tissue condition on peri-implant health and disease: a retrospective clinical study[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2022, 42(2): e51-e58.
[3] Gharpure AS, Latimer JM, Aljofi FE, et al.Role of thin gingival phenotype and inadequate keratinized mucosa width (<2 mm) as risk indicators for peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis[J]. J Periodontol, 2021, 92(12): 1687-1696.
[4] Shaya F, Butler B, Hsu YT.Role of keratinized tissue on the management of peri-implantitis: a case report[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2023, 43(4): 517-523.
[5] Solonko M, Regidor E, Ortiz-Vigon A, et al.Efficacy of keratinized mucosal augmentation with a collagen matrix concomitant to the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: a dual-center randomized clinical trial[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2022, 33(1): 105-119.
[6] 范晶, 郑圆, 郭丹妮, 等. 冲牙器辅助对口腔正畸患者牙龈龈沟液炎性因子及牙周健康状况的影响[J]. 口腔材料器械杂志, 2023, 32(2): 143-146.
Fan J, Zheng Y, Guo DN, et al.Effects of dental irrigator assistance on gingival crevicular fluid inflammatory factors and periodontal health status of orthodontic patients[J]. Journal of Oral Materials and Devices, 2019, 32(2): 143-146.
[7] Sadeghi M, Ghavimi MA, Khorshidi R, et al.Evaluation of keratinized gingiva changes with buccal-based modified palatal flap in anterior maxillary implants[J]. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects, 2022, 16(3): 186-189.
[8] Dini C, Borges GA, Costa RC, et al.Peri-implant and esthetic outcomes of cemented and screw-retained crowns using zirconia abutments in single implant-supported restorations-a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2021, 32(10): 1143-1158.
[9] Agabiti I, Apaza AK, Nakajima Y, et al.An enigmatic soft tissue creeping phenomenon: the spontaneous peri-implant mucosa margin and papilla growth. a retrospective clinical study[J]. Clin Exp Dent Res, 2021, 7(4): 474-483.
[10] 孙文韬, 谢玉峰, 束蓉. 根面覆盖美学评分的可靠性和准确性分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2022, 42(5): 602-608.
Sun WT, Xie YF, Shu R.Analysis of reliability and accuracy of aesthetic score of root surface coverage[J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Medical Science), 2022, 42(5): 602-608.
[11] Larsson L, Kavanagh NM, Nguyen T, et al.Influence of epigenetics on periodontitis and peri-implantitis pathogenesis[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2022, 90(1): 125-137.
[12] Kalsi AS, Moreno F, Petridis H.Biomarkers associated with periodontitis and peri-implantitis: a systematic review[J]. J Periodontal Implant Sci, 2021, 51(1): 3-17.
[13] Roccuzzo A, Imber JC, Salvi GE, et al.Peri-implantitis as the consequence of errors in implant therapy[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2023, 92(1): 350-361.
[14] Noharet R, Van Dooren E.Combination of cone beam computed tomography and CAD-CAM techniques for maintaining natural emergence profile in immediate extraction and/or implant placement and restoration of a central incisor: a dental technique[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2019, 122(3): 193-197.
[15] Liu XQ, Tan Y, Liu JZ, et al.A digital technique for fabricating implant-supported interim restorations in the esthetic zone[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2018, 119(4): 540-544.
[16] 汪俊恺. 不同牙龈生物型和角化龈宽度对种植体周围骨组织的影响[D]. 大连: 大连医科大学, 2022.
Wang JK.Effects of different gingival biotypes and keratinized gingival width on bone tissue around implants[D]. Dalian: Dalian Medical University,2022.
[17] Ravidà A, Arena C, Tattan M, et al.The role of keratinized mucosa width as a risk factor for peri-implant disease: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2022, 24(3): 287-300.
[18] Vlachodimou E, Fragkioudakis I, Vouros I.Is there an association between the gingival phenotype and the width of keratinized gingiva: a systematic review[J]. Dent J (Basel), 2021, 9(3): 34-46.
[19] Tavelli L, Barootchi S, Avila-Ortiz G, et al.Peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification and its impact on peri-implant health: a systematic review and network meta-analysis[J]. J Periodontol, 2021, 92(1): 21-44.
[20] Rodrigues DM, Chambrone L, Montez C, et al.Current landmarks for gingival thickness evaluation in maxillary anterior teeth: a systematic review[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2023, 27(4): 1363-1389.
[21] 封伟, 孙园园, 王树峰. 不同牙龈厚度对平台转移种植体周围骨改建的影响研究[J].中国实用口腔科杂志, 2020, 13(1): 30-33.
Feng W, Sun YY, Wang SF.Effect of different gingival thickness on bone remodeling around platform transfer implant[J]. Chinese Journal of Practical Stomatology, 2020, 13(1): 30-33.
[22] 陈晓波, 刘南霞, 毛玮刚. 前牙美学区不同牙龈生物型对上前牙全瓷冠修复患者牙美学效果的影响[J]. 中国美容医学, 2023, 32(6): 150-153.
Chen XB, Liu NX, Mao WG.Effect of different gingival biotypes in anterior dental aesthetic area on dental aesthetic effect of patients with porcelain crown restoration[J]. Chinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine, 2023, 32(6): 150-153.