牙根留置技术在前牙区种植修复的临床效果研究

doi:10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2022.11.008

口腔医学研究 ›› 2022, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (11): 1037-1041.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2022.11.008

牙根留置技术在前牙区种植修复的临床效果研究

杜瑞钿, 刘森庆^*, 何娟, 邱耀聪

深圳市龙岗区耳鼻咽喉医院口腔科,深圳市龙岗区口腔医学研究所广东深圳 518172

收稿日期:2022-04-06 出版日期:2022-11-25 发布日期:2022-11-22
通讯作者: *刘森庆,E-mail:liusenqing@163.com
作者简介:杜瑞钿(1982~ ),女,广东潮州人,硕士,副主任医师,研究方向:口腔美学修复的基础和临床研究。

Clinical Study on Outcomes of Root Submergence Technique for Implant-supported Restorations in Anterior Region.

DU Ruitian, LIU Senqing^*, HE Juan, QIU Yaocong

Department of Stomatology, Shenzhen Longgang ENT Hospital, Shenzhen Longgang Institute of Stomatology, Shenzhen 518172, China

Received:2022-04-06 Online:2022-11-25 Published:2022-11-22

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的: 评价牙根留置技术(root submergence technique, RST)应用于前牙区种植体支持式固定桥桥体位置的临床效果,并探讨其技术要点。方法: 选择上颌前牙区拟行种植体支持式固定桥修复的患者,桥体位点采用牙根留置技术,延期以种植体支持的树脂临时固定桥成形牙龈形态,3个月后行最终修复,最终修复后1年复诊。最终修复当天和复诊时评估桥体位置红色美学指数(pink esthetic score, PES);复诊时评估桥体位置和对侧同名牙的改良菌斑指数(modified plaque index,mPI)和改良出血指数(modified sulcus bleeding index,mSBI);记录随访期内各种相关并发症。结果: 本研究共有11个桥体位置留置牙根,随访期内未出现牙根留置的相关并发症;最终修复当天和1年后复诊时的PES平均值分别为8.91±0.94和9.18±0.87,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);复诊时软组织健康状况良好,桥体位置mPI和mSBI平均值分别为0.82±0.60和0.45±0.52,对侧同名牙mPI和mSBI平均值分别为0.73±0.79和0.36±0.50,两个检测位置的mPI和mSBI平均值差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论: 牙根留置技术应用于前牙区种植体支持式固定桥桥体位置具有良好的短期临床效果。

关键词: 牙根留置技术, 前牙区, 桥体, 种植修复, 临床效果

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the outcomes of root submergence technique (RST) in the anterior pontic sites of implant-supported fix partial bridges, and to discuss its technical key points. Methods: Patients who accepted implant-supported fix partial bridges in the anterior maxillary region were chosen for the present study. Roots were submerged in the pontic sites and soft tissue was conditioned with provisional implant-supported restorations after implant osseointegration. Final restorations were produced after 3 months. Patients revisited after one year. Pink esthetic score (PES) was recorded on the day of final restoration and 1-year revisit. Modified plaque index (mPI) and modified sulcus bleeding index (mSBI) were recorded on the day of 1-year revisit. Complications were monitored during the follow-up period. Results: A total of 11 roots were submerged. There was no RST related complication during the follow-up period. Mean PES value at final restoration and 1-year revisit were 8.91±0.94 and 9.18±0.87, respectively, which had no significant difference (P>0.05). At 1-year revisit, mean value of mPI and mSBI at pontic sites were 0.82±0.60 and 0.45±0.52, while 0.73±0.79 and 0.36±0.50 at contralateral sites. The differences between pontic and contralateral sites were not significant (P>0.05). Conclusion: The short-term outcomes of RST are satisfied in the anterior pontic sites of implant-supported fix partial bridges.

Key words: root submergence technique, anterior region, pontic, implant-supported restoration, clinical outcomes

杜瑞钿, 刘森庆, 何娟, 邱耀聪. 牙根留置技术在前牙区种植修复的临床效果研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2022, 38(11): 1037-1041.

DU Ruitian, LIU Senqing, HE Juan, QIU Yaocong. Clinical Study on Outcomes of Root Submergence Technique for Implant-supported Restorations in Anterior Region.[J]. Journal of Oral Science Research, 2022, 38(11): 1037-1041.

参考文献

[1] 马悦,宋珂.美学区即刻种植共识化流程的探讨[J].口腔医学研究,2021,37(10): 879-882.
[2] Boon L, De Mars G, Favril C, et al. Esthetic evaluation of single implant restorations, adjacent single implant restorations, and implant-supported fixed partial dentures: A 1-year prospective study [J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2020, 22(1):128-137.
[3] Bassir SH, Alhareky M, Wangsrimongkol B, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of hard tissue outcomes of alveolar ridge preservation [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2018, 33(5):979-994.
[4] Wong KM, Chneh CM, Ang CW. Modified root submergence technique for multiple implant-supported maxillary anterior restorations in a patient with thin gingival biotype: a clinical report [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2012, 107(6):349-352.
[5] Wittneben JG, Gavric J, Sailer I, et al. Clinical and esthetic outcomes of two different prosthetic workflows for implant-supported all-ceramic single crowns-3 year results of a randomized multicenter clinical trail [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2020, 31(5):495-505.
[6] 杜瑞钿,刘森庆,许键,等.两种上部结构设计在前牙区种植修复的临床效果研究[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2021,37(3):153-156.
[7] Graetz C, El-Sayed KF, Geiken A, et al. Effect of periodontitis history on implant success: A long-term evaluation during supportive periodontal therapy in a university setting [J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2018, 22(1):235-244.
[8] Sun C, Zhao J, Liu Z, et al. Comparing conventional flap-less immediate implantation and socket-shield technique for esthetic and clinical outcomes: A randomized clinical study [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2020, 31(2):181-191.
[9] Souza CA, Pinho RCM, de Siqueira RAC, et al. Factors influencing the presence of papilla between adjacent implants and between a tooth and an implant [J]. Acta Stomatol Croat, 2019, 53(4):337-346.
[10] Testori T, Weinstein T, Scutellà F, et al. Implant placement in the esthetic area: criteria for positioning single and multiple implants [J]. Periodontol 2000, 2018, 77(1):176-196.
[11] Comut A, Mehra M, Saito H. Pontic site development with a root submergence technique for a screw-retained prosthesis in the anterior maxilla [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2013, 110(5):337-343.
[12] Salama M, Ishikawa T, Salama H, et al. Advantages of the root submergence technique for pontic site development in esthetic implant therapy [J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2007, 27(6):521-527.
[13] Gongloff RK. Vital root retention. A 5-year experience [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 1986, 15(1):33-38.
[14] Simon JH, Kimura JT. Maintenance of alveolar bone by the intentional replantation of roots [J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1974, 37(6):936-945.

[1]	贾相斌, 曹潇, 张宇宸, 眭永潮, 周秦. 美学区单颗种植体临时修复后不同印模方式获取软组织轮廓准确性的对比分析[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2022, 38(9): 837-842.
[2]	高静, 江鹭鹭, 何晶, 张翀, 王丹宁, 赵宝红. 窄直径种植体在下颌前牙区临床疗效的回顾性研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2022, 38(4): 320-324.
[3]	周立伟, 李孟铨. 多单位种植修复中组合运用螺丝固位与粘接固位的临床回顾性研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2022, 38(2): 125-128.
[4]	李超越, 巢家瑞, 王振宇, 陈度, 刘飞, 沈颉飞. 无牙颌种植传统与数字化印模精度的体外比较研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2022, 38(11): 1026-1032.
[5]	张丽媛, 金武龙, 包雪梅. 60例蒙古族青少年上颌前牙区牙厚度与骨骼面型的相关性分析[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2021, 37(1): 53-57.
[6]	周立伟. 种植多单位修复中螺丝固位与粘接固位联合运用中机械并发症发生情况的回顾性研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2021, 37(1): 63-66.
[7]	乐柯, 董衡, 陈力, 杨光雯, 陈琳, 刘晖, 周娜, 牟永斌. 应用三维预成型钛网在上颌前牙区骨增量疗效的临床研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2020, 36(5): 481-485.
[8]	陈江, 张思慧. 无牙颌种植修复的数字化临床诊疗流程[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2020, 36(3): 193-198.
[9]	李爱玲, 周弘. “三明治”截骨术在前牙区种植修复临床应用[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2020, 36(3): 293-297.
[10]	呙誉东, 周炼. 帐篷螺丝技术在上前牙区连续缺失种植修复中的疗效评价[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2020, 36(3): 298-301.
[11]	刘晓庆, 周弘. 种植二期手术同期临时冠塑形牙龈的临床观察[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2019, 35(5): 476-479.
[12]	周强强,廖红兵. 种植单冠螺丝固位的机械原理与松动原因的研究进展[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2019, 35(2): 122-124.
[13]	刘族志, 付东杰. 种植修复体改良粘接技术对种植体周组织健康的影响[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2019, 35(10): 944-947.
[14]	袁硕,陈志宇. 铸瓷贴面临床效果的4年回顾性研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2018, 34(9): 983-986.
[15]	贺小吉, 刘党利, 孙贵峰, 程涛. 口膜控法上颌窦内提升术的临床应用研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2018, 34(6): 666-670.

牙根留置技术在前牙区种植修复的临床效果研究

Clinical Study on Outcomes of Root Submergence Technique for Implant-supported Restorations in Anterior Region.

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics