口腔医学研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (10): 948-952.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2019.10.010

• 口腔种植修复学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

上颌中切牙种植累及鼻腭管的处理的初步研究

李志进1, 翁雁鸣1, 周荣华2, 杜姣3, 熊才华1, 董青山1, 郭家平1*   

  1. 1. 中国人民解放军中部战区总医院口腔科 湖北 武汉 430070;
    2. 中国科学院大学武汉存济口腔医院VIP诊室 湖北 武汉 430024;
    3. 中国科学院大学武汉存济口腔医院综合科 湖北 武汉 430024
  • 收稿日期:2019-01-22 出版日期:2019-10-28 发布日期:2019-10-22
  • 通讯作者: 郭家平,E-mail: guojiaping2013@163.com
  • 作者简介:李志进(1982~ ),男,湖北应城人,博士,主治医 师,主要从事口腔种植的临床工作。
  • 基金资助:
    湖北省自然科学基金青年项目 (编号:2017CFB252) 湖北省卫生和计划生育委员会科研项目青年人才 项目(编号:WJ2017Q029)

Management of Nasopalatine Canal Associated with Implant Placement in Maxillary Central Incisor Sites: A Pilot Study.

LI Zhijin1, WENG Yanming1, ZHOU Ronghua2, DU Jiao3, XIONG Caihua1, DONG Qingshan1, GUO Jiaping1*   

  1. 1. Department of Stomatology, General Hospital of Central Theater Comand of PLA, Wuhan 430070, China;
    2. Department of VIP Dental Service, Wuhan Savaid Stomatology Hospital, Wuhan 430024, China;
    3. Department of General Dentistry, Wuhan Savaid Stomatology Hospital, Wuhan 430024, China.
  • Received:2019-01-22 Online:2019-10-28 Published:2019-10-22

摘要: 目的:探索上颌中切牙位点种植累及鼻腭管的外科处理方法,评估其安全性和有效性。方法:回顾性分析2016年7月~2018年6月上颌中切牙位点种植的病例。纳入标准为术前数字化种植规划中种植体进入鼻腭管,及术中种植窝预备完成后牙周探针检查发现种植窝与鼻腭管穿通。根据穿孔的大小,采取不同的术式处理鼻腭管,最终完成种植治疗。评估内容包括:前腭的感觉异常情况,术后疼痛以及种植体的存留率。结果:共收集48例患者(71个中切牙区种植位点),符合纳入标准的病例10例(10个中切牙区种植位点)。10例中切牙位点种植体骨结合良好,仅有1例患者报告了术后暂时性的前腭感觉异常,但在3个月内自行恢复。在最后一次复查(随访期6~18个月),10例患者没有出现种植体失败,无一例种植位点近远中骨吸收超过1 mm,种植体周围组织健康。结论:在上颌中切牙位点的种植治疗前必须评估鼻腭管的形态和大小,按照修复为导向的种植原则,当无法避免种植体穿通鼻腭管,可根据穿孔大小采取不同的术式,获得可预期的临床疗效。

关键词: 鼻腭管, 鼻腭神经血管束, 上颌中切牙, 种植牙

Abstract: Objective: To explore the management of nasopalatine canal associated with implant placement in maxillary central sites and assess the efficacy and safety. Method: A case series retrospective study was performed between July 2016 and June 2018 of patients who were treated with implants in maxillary central incisor sites. The inclusion criteria were that cases with perforation into the nasopalatine canal during the digital treatment planning and implant osteotomy. According to the size of the perforation, different approaches were adopted to facilitate the implant placement in the compromised sites. The following parameters were assessed: neurosensory status of the anterior palate, postoperative pain and implant survival rate. Results:Of the 48 patients (71 implant sites), a total of 10 patients (10 implant sites) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Osseointegration was achieved in all of the 10 implants. Only one patient reported minor sensory alterations in the anterior palatal zone after implant placement, which disappeared in 3 months. At the final examination (follow-up of 6-18 months), no fixtures had been lost, and no marginal bone loss exceeding 1 mm was observed at the mesial and distal aspects of any implant, and all peri-implant tissues had a healthy appearance. Conclusion: The morphology and dimensions of the nasopalatine canal should be properly evaluated prior to dental implant insertion to replace missing maxillary central incisors. If penetration into the nasopalatine duct cannot be avoided during the osteotomy following the principle of prosthetically driven implant placement in the maxillary central incisor site, proper approaches could be adopted according to the size of the penetration, and predictable effects of rehabilitation of the atrophied premaxilla could be obtained.

Key words: nasopalatine canal, nasopalatine neurovascular bundle, maxillary central incisor, dental implants