上颌中切牙牙弓形态、牙槽骨厚度及矢状面位置的锥体束计算机断层扫描研究

doi:10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2024.01.012

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的:利用锥体束计算机断层扫描(cone-beam computed tomography,CBCT)图像评估上颌前牙牙弓形态、中切牙牙根矢状位置(sagittal root position,SRP)与牙槽骨厚度的关系,并根据年龄、性别对其分组,临床医生在即刻种植体植入时应考虑这些因素。方法:对符合纳入标准的160例患者的CBCT影像进行分析,根据牙弓形态、年龄、性别对其分组,对患者的320张上颌中切牙矢状位CBCT图像进行了检查,以测量唇侧骨板和腭侧骨板厚度,进行统计学分析。结果:牙槽骨厚度因牙弓形态和SRP的不同而有显著差异。方圆形牙弓型和Ⅰ类SRP在腭侧的骨厚度最高。尖圆形弓型和Ⅱ类SRP在唇侧骨厚度最高。牙弓形态与SRP之间无显著相关性。年龄、性别、牙弓形态、SRP与牙槽骨的根尖水平厚度有显著相关性。结论:患者的年龄、性别、牙弓形态和SRP与上颌中切牙的牙槽骨厚度有不同程度的相关性。因此,临床医生在计划即刻种植体植入时应考虑这些因素。

关键词: 上颌中切牙, 锥体束计算机断层扫描, 牙弓形态, 牙槽骨厚度, 种植牙

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the relationship between arch morphology, sagittal root position (SRP), and alveolar bone thickness of maxillary anterior teeth through cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images, and to group them according to age and gender. Methods: The CBCT images of 160 patients who met the inclusion criteria in Henan Province were analyzed and grouped according to dental arch morphology, age, and gender. Three hundred and twenty sagittal CBCT images of the maxillary central incisor of these patients were examined to measure the thickness of labial and palatal plates for statistical analysis. Results: The alveolar bone thickness was significantly depended on arch morphology and SRP. The bone thickness in the palatine side was the highest in the circular dental arch and grade I SRP. Apical arch type and grade II SRP type had the highest labial bone thickness. There was no correlation between dental arch morphology and SRP. Age, gender, arch shape, and SRP were significantly correlated with alveolar bone thickness. Conclusion: Age, gender, arch shape, and SRP were correlated with alveolar bone thickness of maxillary central incisor. Clinicians should consider these factors when planning implantation.

Key words: maxillary central incisor teeth, cone-beam CT, dental arch morphology, alveolar bone thickness, dental implantation

范玉亭, 扈宗鑫, 甘抗, 朱娟芳. 上颌中切牙牙弓形态、牙槽骨厚度及矢状面位置的锥体束计算机断层扫描研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2024, 40(1): 61-65.

FAN Yuting, HU Zongxin, GAN Kang, ZHU Juanfang. Arch Morphology, Alveolar Bone Thickness, and Sagittal Plane Position of Maxillary Middle Incisors Evaluated by Cone-beam Computed Tomography[J]. Journal of Oral Science Research, 2024, 40(1): 61-65.

参考文献

[1] 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.
[2] Buser D, Martin W, Belser UC. Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2004, 19 Suppl:43-61.
[3] Grunder U, Gracis S, Capelli M. Influence of the 3-D bone-to-implant relationship on esthetics [J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2005, 25(2): 113-119.
[4] Moy PK, Medina D, Shetty V, et al. Dental implant failure rates and associated risk factors [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2005, 20(4): 569-577.
[5] Gakonyo J, Mohamedali AJ, Mungure EK. Cone beam computed tomography assessment of the buccal bone thickness in anterior maxillary teeth: relevance to immediate implant placement [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2018, 33(4): 880-887.
[6] Zhang CY, DeBaz C, Bhandal G, et al. Buccal bone thickness in the esthetic zone of postmenopausal women: a CBCT analysis [J]. Implant Dent, 2016, 25(4): 478-484.
[7] Bidez MW, Misch CE. Clinical biomechanics in implant dentistry. In: Misch CE. Dental implant prosthetics[M]. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby, 2005:95-106.
[8] Zarei M, Jahangirnezhad M, Yousefimanesh H, et al. A comparative study on the stress distribution around dental implants in three arch form models for replacing six implants using finite element analysis [J]. J Indian Soc Periodontol, 2018, 22(2): 127-132.
[9] Misch CE. Maxillary arch implant considerations: fixes and overdenture prosthesis. In: Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry[M]. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier, 2008:367-388.
[10] Kan JY, Roe P, Rungcharassaeng K, et al. Classification of sagittal root position in relation to the anterior maxillary osseous housing for immediate implant placement: a cone beam computed tomography study [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2011, 26(4): 873-876.
[11] 夏婷,施斌.上颌单前牙即刻种植修复和延期种植修复的美学效果比较[J].口腔医学研究,2016,32(1):50-54.
[12] Baumgaertel S, Palomo JM, Palomo L, et al . Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2009, 136(1): 19-28.
[13] Hassan NA, Al-Radha ASD. CBCT evaluation of quality and quantity of bones for immediate implant treatment planning in central incisor area in relation to arch form [J]. ScientificWorldJournal, 2023, 2023:8863318.
[14] Palacci P, Nowzari H. Soft tissue enhancement around dental implants [J]. Periodontol 2000, 2008, 47: 113-132.
[15] Morton D, Chen ST, Martin WC, et al. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding optimizing esthetic outcomes in implant dentistry [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014, 29 Suppl: 216-220.
[16] Spray JR, Black CG, Morris HF, et al. The influence of bone thickness on facial marginal bone response: stage 1 placement through stage 2 uncovering [J]. Ann Periodontol, 2000, 5(1): 119-128.
[17] Khoury J, Ghosn N, Mokbel N, et al. Buccal bone thickness overlying maxillary anterior teeth: A clinical and radiographic prospective human study [J]. Implant Dent, 2016, 25(4): 525-531.
[18] López-Jarana P, Díaz-Castro CM, Falcão A, et al. Thickness of the buccal bone wall and root angulation in the maxilla and mandible: an approach to cone beam computed tomography [J]. BMC Oral Health, 2018, 18(1): 194.
[19] Wang HM, Shen JW, Yu MF, et al. Analysis of facial bone wall dimensions and sagittal root position in the maxillary esthetic zone: a retrospective study using cone beam computed tomography [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014, 29(5): 1123-1129.
[20] Grunder U, Gracis S, Capelli M. Influence of the 3-D boneto-implant relationship on esthetics [J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2005, 25(2): 113-119.
[21] Gakonyo J, Mohamedali AJ, Mungure EK. Cone beam computed tomography assessment of the buccal bone thickness in anterior maxillary teeth: relevance to immediate implant placement [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2018, 33(4): 880-887.
[22] Do TA, Shen YW, Fuh LJ, et al. Clinical assessment of the palatal alveolar bone thickness and its correlation with the buccolingual angulation of maxillary incisors for immediate implant placement [J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2019, 21(5): 1080-1086.
[23] Soumya P, Chappidi V, Koppolu P, et al. Evaluation of facial and palatal alveolar bone thickness and sagittal root position of maxillary anterior teeth on cone beam computerized tomograms [J]. Niger J Clin Pract, 2021, 24(3): 329-334.
[24] Kan JY, Roe P, Rungcharassaeng K, et al. Classification of sagittal root position in relation to the anterior maxillary osseous housing for immediate implant placement: a cone beam computed tomography study [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2011, 26(4): 873-876.
[25] Benjasupattananan S, Sirikururat P. Relationship between facial alveolar bone thickness and root position of maxillary anterior teeth using cone beam computed tomography [J]. J Dent Assoc Thai, 2018, 68: 38-47.
[26] Xu D, Wang Z, Sun L, et al. Classification of the root position of the maxillary central incisors and its clinical significance in immediate implant placement [J]. Implant Dent, 2016, 25(4): 520-524.
[27] Lei C, Yu Q, Wu D, et al. Comparison of alveolar bone width and sagittal tooth angulation of maxillary central incisors in Class Ⅰ and Class Ⅲ canine relationships: a retrospective study using CBCT [J]. BMC Oral Health, 2022, 22(1): 303.