上海口腔医学

上海口腔医学 ›› 2022, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (3): 309-312.doi: 10.19439/j.sjos.2022.03.017

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

牙周病患者前牙即刻种植和常规种植修复2 年内稳定性比较

仲琳1, 何辰菲2, 魏明贵1, 吕得志1, 王国世1, 李韶伟1   

  1. 1.上海市静安区中心医院（ 复旦大学附属华山医院静安分院） 口腔科,上海 200040;
    2.上海天坛普华医院 口腔科,上海 200021
  • 收稿日期:2021-07-29 修回日期:2021-11-15 出版日期:2022-06-25 发布日期:2022-07-07
  • 通讯作者: 李韶伟,E-mail:leeshaowei@sina.com
  • 作者简介:仲琳（1985-）,女,硕士,主治医师,E-mail:138932676@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    上海市静安区卫生科研课题（2018QN01）

Comparison of two-year stability between immediate implant action and delayed implantation for anterior teeth with periodontal disease

ZHONG Lin1, HE Chen-fei2, WEI Ming-gui1, LYU De-zhi1, WANG Guo-shi1, LI Shao-wei1   

  1. 1. Department of Stomatology, Jing'an District Center Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University. Shanghai 200040;
    2. Department of Stomatology, St.Michael Hospital of Shanghai. Shanghai 200021, China
  • Received:2021-07-29 Revised:2021-11-15 Online:2022-06-25 Published:2022-07-07

PDF (PC)

180

摘要： 目的: 探讨牙周病患者前牙拔除后即刻种植的可行性和2年内的临床效果。方法: 选择2016—2018年牙周病前牙区种植治疗患者30 例（36颗种植体）,随机分为即刻种植组和常规种植组。其中,即刻种植组17 颗,常规种植组19 颗。术后随访2 年,记录种植体的牙周探诊深度、美学评分、种植体颈部骨吸收等临床参数,采用SPSS 21.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果: 2 年随访期内无种植体脱落,各时间点2组种植体探诊深度差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。2组种植体周围骨吸收量无显著差异（P>0.05）。完成上部结构修复后6 、12 、24 个月,2组美学评分无显著差异（P>0.05）,但修复后第3 个月的美学评分差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,即刻种植组获得更满意的种植体周围软组织形态。结论: 在适当治疗条件下,牙周病患者前牙即刻种植与常规种植的成功率无显著差异,手术次数减少,疗程缩短。在软组织美学方面,即刻种植在修复后早期略优于常规种植,并且可维持较好的软组织美学效果。

关键词: 牙周病, 即刻种植, 探诊深度, 红色美学评分

Abstract: PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility of immediate implantation after extraction of anterior teeth in patients with periodontal disease and its clinical effect within 2 years. METHODS: Thirty patients (36 implants) who underwent anterior dental implant treatment for periodontal disease from 2016 to 2018 were randomly divided into immediate implantation group (17 implants) and delayed implantation group (19 implants). The patients were followed up for 2 years, the clinical parameters such as periodontal probing depth, pink esthetic score（PES）and implant neck bone resorption volume of implant neck were obtained. The data was statistically analyzed with SPSS 21.0 software package. RESULTS: During the 2-year follow-up period, no implant loss, and there was no significant difference in the depth of peri-implant probing between the two groups at each time point(P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the volume of bone resorption at implant neck between the two groups(P>0.05). At 6, 12 and 24 months after completion of superstructure repair, there was no significant difference in pink esthetic score（PES）between the two groups (P>0.05), but there was significant difference in pink esthetic score（PES) at the third month after restoration (P<0.05). The immediate implantation group obtained more satisfactory soft tissue morphology around the implants. CONCLUSIONS: Under appropriate treatment conditions, there is no significant difference in implant success rate between immediate implantation and delayed implantation of anterior teeth in patients with periodontal disease. At the same time, it reduces the number of operations and shortens the course of treatment. In terms of soft tissue aesthetics, immediate implantation is slightly better than delayed implantation in the early stage after restoration, and can maintain a good soft tissue aesthetic effect.

Key words: Periodontal disease, Immediate implantation, Periodontal probing depth, Pink esthetic score

中图分类号: