...
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of oral implantology >Posterior atrophic jaws rehabilitated with prostheses supported by 6 mm long 4 mm wide implants or by longer implants in augmented bone. One-year post-loading results from a pilot randomised controlled trial.
【24h】

Posterior atrophic jaws rehabilitated with prostheses supported by 6 mm long 4 mm wide implants or by longer implants in augmented bone. One-year post-loading results from a pilot randomised controlled trial.

机译:后牙萎缩性颌骨可通过6 mm长,4 mm宽的植入物或长骨中的较长植入物支撑的假体进行修复。一年的加载后结果来自于一项随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

To evaluate whether 6 mm long by 4 mm wide dental implants could be an alternative to implants at least 10 mm long placed in bone augmented with bone substitutes in posterior atrophic jaws.A total of 20 patients with bilateral atrophic mandibles and 20 patients with bilateral atrophic maxillae, having 5 to 7 mm of bone height above the mandibular canal or below the maxillary sinus, had each side of the jaws randomly allocated according to a split-mouth design. They were allocated to receive one to three 6 mm long and 4 mm wide implants, or implants at least 10 mm long in augmented bone by two different surgeons in different centres. Mandibles were vertically augmented with interpositional equine bone blocks and resorbable barriers, and implants were placed 3 months later. Maxillary sinuses were augmented with particulated porcine bone via a lateral window and implants were placed simultaneously. All implants were submerged and loaded, after 4 months, with provisional prostheses. Four months later, definitive metal-ceramic prostheses were delivered. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, any complication and radiographic peri-implant marginal bone level changes.One patient treated in the mandible dropped out before the 1-year post-loading follow-up. All maxillary implants and prostheses were successful, whereas 2 mandibular prostheses could not be placed on implants at least 10 mm long due to graft failures; one was associated with the loss of 3 implants because of infection. There were no statistically significant differences in implant and prosthesis failures, though significantly more complications occurred at grafted sites in mandibles (P = 0.0078), but not in maxillae (P = 0.1250). In total, 14 complications occurred in 12 patients at augmented sites versus none at 6 mm-long implants. All failures and complications occurred before loading. Patients with mandibular 6 mm-long implants lost an average of 1.05 mm of peri-implant bone at 1 year and patients with mandibular implants at least 10 mm long lost 1.07 mm. These differences were statistically significant (P < 0.001). Patients with maxillary 6 mm-long implants lost an average of 1.02 mm of peri-implant bone at 1 year and patients with maxillary implants at least 10 mm long lost 1.09 mm. These differences were statistically significant (P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in bone level changes up to 1 year between 6 mm and at least 10 mm-long implants in both jaws (mandibles n = 18, mean difference -0.02 mm, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.12, P = 0.7384; maxillae n = 20, mean difference -0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.05, P = 0.2547).Short-term data (1 year after loading) indicate that 6 mm-long implants with a conventional diameter of 4 mm achieved similar if not better results than longer implants placed in augmented bone. Short implants might be a preferable choice to bone augmentation, especially in posterior mandibles since the treatment is faster, cheaper and associated with less morbidity. However, data obtained 5 to 10 years after loading are necessary before making reliable recommendations. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT: Tecnoss and Southern Implants partially supported this trial and donated biomaterials, implants and prosthetic components used in this study. However, the data belonged to the authors and by no means did the manufacturers interfere with the conduct of the trial or the publication of its results.
机译:为了评估6毫米长4毫米宽的牙科植入物是否可以替代至少10毫米长的植入物,将其植入在后部萎缩性颌骨中并用骨替代物进行增强,共20例双侧萎缩性下颌骨患者和20例双侧萎缩性患者上颌骨在下颌管上方或上颌窦下方具有5至7毫米的骨高,根据裂口设计,颌骨的每一侧均随机分配。他们被分配来接受一到三个6毫米长和4毫米宽的植入物,或者由两位在不同中心的外科医生在增强骨中植入至少10毫米长的植入物。下颌骨在垂直方向上增加了介于其间的马骨块和可吸收的屏障,并在3个月后放置了植入物。上颌窦通过侧向窗增加猪颗粒颗粒,并同时放置植入物。 4个月后,将所有植入物浸没并装上临时假体。四个月后,交付了确定的金属陶瓷假体。结果是假体和植入物失败,任何并发症以及影像学检查的种植体周围边缘骨水平变化。接受下颌骨治疗的一名患者在负荷后1年随访前退出。所有上颌植入物和假体均成功,但是由于移植失败,不能将2个下颌假体放置在长度至少10 mm的植入物上。其中一项与因感染而丢失3个植入物有关。尽管在下颌骨的移植部位发生的并发症明显更多(P = 0.0078),但在上颌骨的发生率(P = 0.1250)上,植入物和假体失败并没有统计学上的显着差异。总共有12例患者在增生部位发生了14例并发症,而在6毫米长的种植体中没有发生。所有故障和并发症都发生在装载之前。下颌6 mm长的种植体患者在1年时平均损失了1.05 mm的种植体周围骨,而下颌至少10 mm的种植体患者则损失了1.07 mm。这些差异具有统计学意义(P <0.001)。上颌长度为6 mm的种植体患者在1年时平均损失1.02 mm的种植体周围骨,而上颌长度至少为10 mm的种植体患者则损失1.09 mm。这些差异具有统计学意义(P <0.001)。两个颌骨的6毫米和至少10毫米长的种植体之间长达1年的骨水平变化在统计学上无显着差异(下颌骨n = 18,平均差异-0.02 mm,95%CI -0.16至0.12,P = 0.7384;上颌n = 20,平均差异-0.07毫米,95%CI -0.18至0.05,P = 0.2547)短期数据(加载后1年)表明,6毫米长的植入物的常规直径为4毫米与放置在增强骨中的较长植入物相比,即使取得了甚至更好的效果,也取得了类似的效果。短植入物可能是骨增长的首选选择,尤其是在后下颌骨中,因为治疗更快,更便宜并且发病率更低。但是,加载后5到10年获得的数据对于做出可靠的建议是必要的。利益冲突声明:Tecnoss和Southern Implants部分支持该试验,并捐赠了用于本研究的生物材料,植入物和修复部件。但是,这些数据属于作者所有,制造商决不干预试验的进行或结果的公布。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号