2种修复膜材料用于牙种植引导骨再生的临床效果比较

doi:10.19438/j.cjoms.2020.05.011

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的：比较2种修复膜材料用于牙种植引导骨再生的临床效果。方法：选择上海市静安区牙病防治所2017年9月—2018年9月行牙种植引导骨再生治疗的患者139例,按随机表法分为对照组（68例）和试验组（71例）,对照组应用博特医用胶原修复膜引导骨再生,试验组应用海奥口腔修复膜引导骨再生,术后6个月随访记录修复情况,分别比较2组修复成功率和并发症发生率,并评价成骨厚度和高度、植骨厚度和高度,以及水平和垂直骨生长情况。采用SPSS 20.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果：术后6个月,对照组修复成功率为85.29%（58/68）,试验组为95.77%（68/71）,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);2组植骨厚度和植骨高度无显著差异(P>0.05),试验组成骨厚度、成骨高度、水平骨生长和垂直骨生长均显著高于对照组(P<0.05);对照组并发症发生率为25.00%,显著高于试验组的12.67%(P<0.05)。结论：海奥口腔修复膜引导骨再生的修复成功率优于博特医用胶原修复膜,可更好促进骨和植骨生长,疗效显著,安全性更高,更适合用于牙种植引导骨再生。

关键词: 牙种植, 海奥口腔修复, 博特医用胶原修复膜, 骨再生

Abstract: PURPOSE: To investigate the clinical effect of different oral biofilm materials for guided bone regeneration (GBR) in dental implants. METHODS: A total of 139 patients who underwent guided bone regeneration from September 2017 to September 2018 were enrolled and randomly divided into the control group (68 cases) and experimental group (71 cases). Patients in the control group were treated with BoTe medical collagen membrane for guided bone regeneration, while the patients in the experimental group used Heal-all oral biofilms for guide bone regeneration. The patients were followed for 6 months after implantation. The success rate and complication rate of the two groups were compared, and the thickness and height of the osteogenesis and bone grafts as well as horizontal bone growth, vertical bone growth were measured. SPSS 20.0 software package was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: After 6 months of follow-up, 58 patients in the control group were successfully repaired with a success rate of 85.29%; 68 patients in the experimental group were successfully repaired with a success rate of 95.77%; the success rate of the experimental group was significantly higher than that of the control group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in bone graft thickness and bone graft height between the two groups (P>0.05). The osteogenesis thickness, osteogenesis height, horizontal bone growth and vertical bone growth of the experimental group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.05). The complication rate of the control group was significantly higher than that of the experimental group (25.00% vs. 12.67%, P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The success rate of Heal-all oral biofilms for guided bone regeneration is better than that of BoTe medical collagen membrane, which can effectively promote the growth of bone and bone graft with obvious curative effect and high safety, more suitable for guided bone regeneration in dental implants.

Key words: Dental implant, Haiao oral repair, Bote medical collagen repair membrane, Bone regeneration

中图分类号:

R782.1

李成, 施乐. 2种修复膜材料用于牙种植引导骨再生的临床效果比较[J]. 中国口腔颌面外科杂志, 2020, 18(5): 438-441.

LI Cheng, SHI Le. Clinical analysis of different oral biofilm materials for guided bone regeneration in dental implants[J]. China J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2020, 18(5): 438-441.

参考文献

[1] Li X, Xu P, Xu X, et al.The application of a delayed expansion technique for horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation in dental implantation[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2017, 46(11): 1451-1457.
[2] 赵晓军, 王会超, 许云海, 等. 3D打印种植导板在后牙即刻种植中的临床应用研究[J]. 河北医科大学学报, 2017, 38(6): 691-694.
[3] 卢俊, 孙长安. 浓缩生长因子在口腔修复中的应用效果评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2018, 27(1): 101-103.
[4] Shahriari S, Parandakh A, Azadikhah N, et al.The effect of mandibular flexure on stress distribution in the All-on-4 treated edentulous mandible: A comparative finite-element study based on mechanostat theory[J]. J Long Term Eff Med Implants, 2019, 29(1): 79-86.
[5] Melcher AH.On the repair potential of periodontal tissues[J]. J Periodontol, 1976, 47(5):256-260.
[6] Buser D, Dula K, Belser UC, et al.Localized ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration. II. Surgical procedure in the mandible[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 1995, 15(1): 10-29.
[7] Shahidi S, Zamiri B, Abolvardi M, et al.Comparison of dental panoramic radiography and CBCT for measuring vertical bone height in different horizontal locations of posterior mandibular alveolar process[J]. J Dent (Shiraz), 2018, 19(2): 83-91.
[8] Chiu HY, Lin CH, Hsu CY, et al.IGF1R+ dental pulp stem cells enhanced neuroplasticity in hypoxia-ischemia model[J]. Mol Neurobiol, 2017, 54(10): 8225-8241.
[9] 孙晓琳, 周延民, 赵静辉, 等. PRF在前牙即刻种植修复中的应用[J]. 实用口腔医学杂志, 2018, 34(1): 125-126.
[10] 曹宇皎, 陈婉丽, 谢红梅, 等. 改良粘接固位后牙种植义齿修复对种植体周围组织的影响[J]. 实用口腔医学杂志, 2017, 33(4): 514-517.
[11] Arunjaroensuk S, Panmekiate D, Pimkhaokham P, et al.The Stability of augmented bone between two different membranes used for guided bone regeneration simultaneous with dental implant placement in the esthetic zone[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2017, 33(1): 206-216.
[12] Massoumi F, Taheri M, Mohammadi A, et al.Evaluation of the effect of buccolingual and apicocoronal positions of dental implants on stress and strain in alveolar bone by finite element analysis[J]. J Dent (Tehran), 2018, 15(1): 10-19.
[13] 宫苹. 牙缺失种植修复并发症与咬合[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2018, 53(12): 800-804.
[14] Calderón T, Demiguel D, Arnold W, et al.Calibration of life history traits with epiphyseal closure, dental eruption and bone histology in captive and wild red deer[J]. J Anat, 2019, 235(2): 205-216.
[15] 傅景曙, 汪小华, 吴宏日, 等. 膜诱导技术结合锁定加压钢板外置治疗胫骨感染性骨缺损[J]. 中华骨科杂志, 2018, 38(9): 536-541.
[16] Kniha K, Möhlhenrich SC, Foldenauer AC, et al.Evaluation of bone resorption in fibula and deep circumflex iliac artery flaps following dental implantation: A three-year follow-up study[J]. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2017, 45(4): 474-478.
[17] 李晓茜, 马晓妮, 徐欣. 无牙颌种植固定修复的咬合分析[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2018, 36(6): 54-58.
[18] Mohajerani H, Roozbayani R, Taherian S, et al.The risk factors in early failure of dental implants: a retrospective study[J]. J Dent (Shiraz), 2017, 18(4): 298-303.