明胶海绵与羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷在根尖切除骨缺损修复中的疗效比较

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2025.05.014

上海口腔医学 ›› 2025, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (5): 530-534.doi: 10.19439/j.sjos.2025.05.014

明胶海绵与羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷在根尖切除骨缺损修复中的疗效比较

拓瑞¹, 周谦¹, 呼延静², 田莹³

1.延安大学附属医院口腔颌面外科,2.麻醉科,3.牙周病科,陕西延安 716000

收稿日期:2024-11-04 修回日期:2024-12-18 出版日期:2025-10-25 发布日期:2025-10-31
通讯作者: 周谦,E-mail：zhouqian08@163.com
作者简介:拓瑞（1989-）,男,本科,主治医师,E-mail：tarui091l@163.com
基金资助:
陕西省自然科学基础研究计划项目（2020JQ-563）

Comparison of the efficacy of gelatin sponge and hydroxyapatite bioceramics in the repair of bone defect in apicectomy

Tuo Rui¹, Zhou Qian¹, Hu Yanjing², Tian Ying³

1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2.Department of Anesthesiology, 3.Department of Periodontology, Yan'an University Affiliated Hospital. Yan'an 716000, Shaanxi Province, China

Received:2024-11-04 Revised:2024-12-18 Online:2025-10-25 Published:2025-10-31

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的:评估和比较明胶海绵与羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷（hydroxyapatite ceramic,HA）在根尖切除后骨缺损修复中的临床疗效及生物相容性。方法:选择2020年1月—2024年1月收治的187例根尖囊肿患者,采用随机数字表法分为明胶海绵组（93例）和HA组（94例）。2组患者均行根尖切除术,明胶海绵组采用明胶海绵充填,HA组采用羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷修复。统计并比较两组患者术前及术后2周实验室指标,两组治疗后6个月植骨高度、厚度和骨生长效果,以及两组术后愈合情况及不良反应发生情况。结果:HA组植骨高度、植骨厚度和新生骨密度显著高于明胶海绵组（P<0.05）。术后HA组白细胞计数、中性粒细胞比例、C反应蛋白、红细胞沉降率和血清肌酐水平均显著低于明胶海绵组（P<0.05）。术后HA组丙氨酸氨基转移酶、天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶水平显著高于明胶海绵组（P<0.05）。HA组治疗有效率为100.00%,显著高于明胶海绵组的95.70%（P<0.05）。HA组不良反应发生率为4.26%,显著低于明胶海绵组的12.90%（P<0.05）。结论:羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷在根尖切除后骨缺损修复中表现出比明胶海绵更优的修复效果和生物相容性,可能是一种更有效的骨修复材料,特别是在促进新生骨形成和减少术后并发症方面。

关键词: 根尖切除术, 明胶海绵, 羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷, 骨缺损修复, 临床疗效, 生物相容性

Abstract: PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy and biocompatibility of gelatin sponge and hydroxyapatite bioceramic in the repair of bone defects in apicectomy. METHODS: A total of 187 patients with periapical cysts treated from January 2020 to January 2024 were selected and randomly divided into two groups using a random number table method: gelatin sponge group(n=93) and hydroxyapatite ceramic (HA) group(n=94). Apicectomy was performed in both groups, gelatin sponge group was filled with gelatin sponge, HA group was repaired with hydroxyapatite bioceramics.Preoperative and two-week postoperative laboratory indicators were statistically analyzed and compared between the two groups. Additionally, the bone graft height, thickness and bone growth outcomes were compared six months after treatment. The postoperative healing and occurrence of adverse reactions were also compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The bone graft height, bone graft thickness and new bone density in HA group were significantly higher than those of the gelatin sponge group(P<0.05). The levels of white blood cell count (WBC), neutrophil ratio (NEU), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and serum creatinine (SCR) in HA group were significantly lower than those of the gelatin sponge group(P<0.05). The levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase(AST) in HA group were significantly higher than those in the gelatin sponge group(P<0.05). The effective rate of HA group was 100.00%, which was significantly higher than that of the gelatin sponge group (95.70%, P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in HA group was 4.26%, which was significantly lower than 12.90% in the gelatin sponge group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxyapatite bioceramics shows better repairing effect and biocompatibility than gelatin sponges in bone defect repair after apicectomy. Hydroxyapatite bioceramics may be a more effective bone repair material, especially in promoting new bone formation and reducing postoperative complications.

Key words: Apicectomy, Gelatin sponge, Hydroxyapatite bioceramics, Bone defect repair, Clinical efficacy, Biocompatibility

中图分类号:

R782.1

拓瑞, 周谦, 呼延静, 田莹. 明胶海绵与羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷在根尖切除骨缺损修复中的疗效比较[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2025, 34(5): 530-534.

Tuo Rui, Zhou Qian, Hu Yanjing, Tian Ying. Comparison of the efficacy of gelatin sponge and hydroxyapatite bioceramics in the repair of bone defect in apicectomy[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2025, 34(5): 530-534.

参考文献

[1] Ahmed SS, Kumar R, Rahman T, et al.Management of large mandibular periapical cyst by cortical bone preservation: a case report[J]. Int J Otorhinolaryngol, 2021, 7(8): 1354-1357.
[2] 牛燚梦, 宋其义, 仲维剑. 上颌第一磨牙遗漏MB2伴根尖囊肿的多学科联合治疗1例[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2024, 40(5): 461-463.
[3] Patil S, Kambala R, Bhola N, et al.Case report: introduction of antibiotic releasing calcium sulfate bone void filler beads (Stimulan) for management of an infected cyst of the maxilla[J]. F1000Research, 2023, 12: 1274.
[4] 周琛, 王文雪, 贾仁杰, 等.珊瑚羟基磷灰石骨块移植在重度牙槽骨缺损中的应用效果评价[J].中国口腔颌面外科杂志, 2023, 21(3):231-236.
[5] Sivasundaram S, Pandian C.Performance analysis of classification and segmentation of cysts in panoramic dental images using convolutional neural network architecture[J]. Int J Imaging Syst Technol, 2021,31(4): 2214-2225.
[6] Dachs E, Benisek A, Harlov D, et al.Excess heat capacity and entropy of mixing along the hydroxyapatite-chlorapatite and hydroxyapatite-fluorapatite binaries[J]. Phys Chem Miner, 2021,48(12): 44-53.
[7] Naik C, Srinath N, Ranganath MK, et al.Evaluation of polycaprolactone scaffold for guided bone regeneration in maxillary and mandibular defects: a clinical study[J]. Natl J Maxillofac Surg, 2020, 11(2): 207-212.
[8] Vares Y, Binderman I, Galyant K.Traumatic mandibular cyst defect grafted with autologous dentin and platelet-rich fibrin composite: a case report[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent,2022,42(2): 253-259.
[9] Viggness A, Priyaa S, Pethagounder Thangavelu R, et al.The three-dimensional evaluation of radicular cyst by cone-beam computed tomography[J]. Cureus, 2023, 15(3):e36162.
[10] Vdoviaková K, Jenca A, Jenca A Jr, et al.Regenerative potential of hydroxyapatite-based ceramic biomaterial on mandibular cortical bone: an in vivo study[J]. Biomedicines, 2023,11(3):877.
[11] 历龙飞, 张朝旭, 张馨丹, 等. 先进材料在骨缺损修复中的应用研究进展[J]. 中华骨与关节外科杂志, 2022, 15(1): 63-69.
[12] Fu S, Li H, Wu Y, et al.Nano-/micro-scaled hydroxyapatite ceramic construction and the regulation of immune-associated osteogenic differentiation[J]. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2024,112(2):193-209.
[13] Nik Abdul Ghani NR, Abdul Hamid NF, Karobari MI. Tunnel'radicular cyst and its management with root canal treatment and periapical surgery: a case report[J]. Clin Case Rep, 2020, 8(8): 1387-1391.
[14] Wang M, Pan W, Xu Y, et al.Microglia-mediated neuroinflammation: a potential target for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases[J]. J Inflamm Res, 2022, 15: 3083-3094.
[15] Sanz-Zornoza V, Bernabeu-Mira JC, Soto-Peñaloza D, et al.Ultrasonic osteotomy and regeneration with A-PRF+ for periapical surgery of a mandibular molar with root cyst perforating the lingual osseous cortex: a case report[J]. J Clin Exp Dent, 2023, 15(9): e791-e795.
[16] 王威栋, 宋卫健, 王利群, 等. 羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷填充在口腔根尖囊肿切除骨缺损修复中的应用研究[J]. 中国美容医学, 2022, 31(12): 95-98.
[17] Pupo YM, Leite LMB, Senegaglia AC, et al.Effect of hydroxyapatite microspheres, amoxicillin-hydroxyapatite and collagen-hydroxyapatite composites on human dental pulp-derived mesenchymal stem cells[J]. Materials (Basel), 2021, 14(24): 7515.
[18] Castro-Pineda JA, Montero ML.From nano-hydroxyapatite to pakhomovskyite: a particular phase transformation[J]. J Cryst Growth, 2023, 622: 127388.
[19] Gillner P, Mosch R, von See C. Tunnel fenestration of the mandibula after unsuccessful post traumatic treatment: a case report of the one year follow-up[J]. Dent J (Basel), 2023, 11(2): 37.
[20] Kono T, Sakae T, Nakada H, et al.Confusion between carbonate apatite and biological apatite (carbonated hydroxyapatite) in bone and teeth[J]. Minerals, 2022,12(2): 170.
[21] Gragnano E, Opancina V, Muto G, et al.Treatment of spinal aneurysmal bone cyst with percutaneous injection of hydroxyapatite osteoconductive cement[J]. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2023, 46(12): 1726-1731.

明胶海绵与羟基磷灰石生物陶瓷在根尖切除骨缺损修复中的疗效比较

Comparison of the efficacy of gelatin sponge and hydroxyapatite bioceramics in the repair of bone defect in apicectomy

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 13

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王冕, 侯颖, 田菲菲, 孟丹婕, 韩爽. 全冠与瓷嵌体修复隐裂牙疗效及对咀嚼能力、牙龈状况的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2025, 34(1): 88-93.
[2]	张民珍, 邝惠芳, 杨黎艳, 罗文. 小肠黏膜下层可吸收生物膜在牙槽骨缺损修复中的应用效果评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2024, 33(3): 279-284.
[3]	张扬, 祝庆海, 张永杰, 王晨星, 叶金海. 血管化髂骨肌瓣的应用解剖学特点及其在颌骨缺损修复中的临床应用[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(6): 603-608.
[4]	鲍菁, 秦尉, 朱青, 钱文昊. 不同浓度GO对GelMA机械性能及生物相容性的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(5): 491-496.
[5]	孙海涛, 冯小东. IL-23R基因多态性与复发性口腔溃疡易感性及临床疗效的相关性分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2020, 29(4): 418-422.
[6]	张耀升, 张锴, 陈欣慰, 牟海彰, 丁旺旺, 秦明礼, 张善勇, 龚勤林, 陈刚, 徐伟峰, 虞科恩, 姜艳梅. 3D打印个体化钛网的机械力学性能及生物相容性分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2020, 29(3): 250-256.
[7]	李月玲, 李亦凡, 周煜宗, 杨佳音, 冉幸. 大黄提取物治疗伴糖尿病重度牙周炎的疗效观察[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2018, 27(6): 633-636.
[8]	陆小丽，缪惠灵，柳锋，高美琴. PLGA/鱼皮胶原共轭静电纺丝膜生物相容性分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2018, 27(3): 244-247.
[9]	左园林, 李朝晖, 刘莞洁. MTA根尖屏障术治疗年轻恒牙根尖周炎的临床疗效及满意度评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2017, 26(3): 297-301.
[10]	李少明, 高岭, 任文豪, 薛令法, 许尧祥, 岳金, 郅克谦. 功能性与根治性颈淋巴清扫术在早期口腔鳞状细胞癌治疗中的疗效比较[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2017, 26(3): 305-308.
[11]	高梦珊, 刘帅, 王爱武. 口溃宁颗粒治疗50例复发性口腔溃疡疗效观察[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2016, 25(5): 579-582.
[12]	陈武, 王韦玮, 时新站, 陈宁. 脱细胞真皮基质作为屏障膜的细胞相容性及细胞封闭性的体外研究[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2013, 22(3): 260-264.
[13]	刘超;周正国;袁长永. 射频温控热凝术治疗原发性三叉神经痛648例临床分析 [J]. 上海口腔医学, 2012, 21(4): 466-469.