«上一篇/Previous Article|本期目录/Table of Contents|下一篇/Next Article»

《中国美容医学》[ISSN:1008-6445/CN:61-1347/R]

卷:

期数:

2020年5期

页码:

127-130

栏目:

出版日期:

2020-05-10

文章信息/Info

Title:

 Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Patients with Missing Teeth after Routine
Implantation and Immediate Implant Restoration

文章编号:

1008-6455（2020）05-0127-04

作者:

 蔡 剑; 唐伟成; 孙丽君; 束 为

Author(s):

 CAI Jian;  TANG Wei-cheng;  SUN Li-jun;  SHU Wei

关键词:

 [关键词]牙齿缺失; 常规种植; 即刻种植; 牙槽骨; 满意度

Keywords:

 Key words: missing teeth;  routine implantation;  immediate implantation;  alveolar bone;  satisfaction

分类号:

R782.12

文献标志码:

A

摘要:

[摘要]目的：探讨牙齿缺失患者行常规种植和即刻种植修复后的临床效果。方法：选择笔者医院2017年3月-2018年9月收治
的118例牙齿缺失患者，根据治疗方法和种植情况分为常规种植组和即刻种植组。常规种植组：62例，给予常规种植进行治
疗；即刻种植组：5 6例，给予即刻种植进行治疗。比较两组患者的临床疗效，观察两组修复后牙槽骨及种植体周围
情况。结果：两组治疗后，常规种植组总有效率为1 0 0 %，即刻种植组总有效率为1 0 0 %，两组差异不具有统计学意
义（P ＞0 . 0 5）；常规种植组PES得分（12.3±3.32）分，即刻种植组为（11.8±3.19）分，两组比较差异不具有统计学意
义（P ＞0.05）；牙槽骨吸收情况：常规种植组总体吸收程度1.14±0.58，即刻种植组为0.94±0.42，两组比较差异具有统
计学意义（P ＜0.05）；常规种植组的临床总满意率88.71%，明显低于即刻种植组的98.21%，两组比较差异显著，具有统计
学意义（χ2=2.05，P =0.04）。结论：常规种植和即刻种植对牙齿缺失进行修复的临床疗效相似，安全性均较高，但相对而
言即刻种植可降低牙槽骨吸收，提高患者满意度，值得临床推广应用。

Abstract:

Abstract: Objective To explore the clinical effects of routine implants and immediate implant repair in patients with missing
teeth. Methods 118 patients with tooth loss who were admitted to our hospital from March 2017 to September 2018 were
selected. According to the treatment method and planting situation, they were divided into the conventional planting group and
the immediate planting group, and the conventional planting group was treated with conventional planting. 56 patients in the
planting group were given immediate treatment for treatment. The clinical effi cacy of the two groups of patients was compared,
and the effects of alveolar bone and implants around the two groups were observed. Results After treatment, the total effective
rate was 100% in the conventional planting group and 100% in the immediate planting group. The difference between the two
groups was not statistically signifi cant (P ＞0.05). The PES score of the conventional planting group was 12.3±3.32, planted
immediately. The group was 11.8±3.19. The difference between the two groups was not statistically signifi cant (P ＞0.05). The
alveolar bone resorption rate was 1.14±0.58 in the conventional implant group and 0.94±0.42 in the immediate implant group.
Statistical signifi cance (P ＜0.05). The clinical total satisfaction rate of the conventional implantation group was 88.71%, which
was signifi cantly lower than the clinical total satisfaction rate of the immediate implantation group 98.21%. The difference
between the two groups was signifi cant. Statistical signifi cance (χ2=2.05, P =0.04). Conclusion Conventional planting and
immediate planting have similar clinical effects on dental implants, and the safety is higher. However, immediate planting can
reduce alveolar bone resorption and improve patient satisfaction, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

常用功能

更新日期/Last Update: 2020-05-29