Gheisari Rasoul, Eatemadi Hesamuddin, Alavian Akram
Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Postgraduate Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
J Dent (Shiraz). 2017 Dec;18(4):272-276.
Dental implant is one of the best choices for reconstruction of aesthetic and function. High success rate of these treatments are related to some considerations such as case selection, implant system selection and surgical methods. One-stage or two-stage surgical approaches are routine surgical methods in dental implant treatments. The minimum rate of bone loss around fixtures is the most important criteria for evaluation of implant treatment success that can be affected by different methods of surgery.
This experimental study has been done to compare the crestal bone loss at mesial and distal surface of implants installed through either one-stage or two-stage surgical approach.
In the present randomized clinical trial, 310 Astra Tech implant system were divided into two unequal groups to be used for 140 patients. One hundred and seventy implants were inserted through one-stage and 140 through two-stage surgical approach. The baseline parallel periapical radiography was provided immediately after the surgery. Six months after the functional loading, another radiographic image was provided by using the same technique and machine. Marginal bone loss was calculated by using Adobe Photoshop CS5 software. Data were statistically analyzed with SPSS software. values less than 0.05 were considered as significant.
The mean Bone loss on the mesial and distal surfaces of implants inserted through one-stage surgery and two-stage surgery was 0.76±0.04 and 0.842±0.04 mm respectively. No notable marginal bone change was observed between the maxilla (0.860mm) and mandible (0.729mm). Moreover, Value was>0.05 in all samples, indicating no significant difference in the crestal bone loss.
Accordingly, one-stage surgical technique may provide better esthetic and function for dental implants. There is no significant difference between the two approaches concerning the marginal bone loss.
牙种植体是美学和功能重建的最佳选择之一。这些治疗的高成功率与一些因素有关,如病例选择、种植体系统选择和手术方法。一期或二期手术方法是牙种植治疗中的常规手术方法。种植体周围骨丢失的最低率是评估种植治疗成功的最重要标准,这可能会受到不同手术方法的影响。
本实验研究旨在比较通过一期或二期手术方法植入的种植体近中和远中表面的牙槽嵴骨丢失情况。
在本随机临床试验中,将310个Astra Tech种植体系统分为两组,用于140例患者。170个种植体通过一期手术植入,140个通过二期手术植入。术后立即提供基线平行根尖片。功能加载6个月后,使用相同技术和机器提供另一张放射影像。使用Adobe Photoshop CS5软件计算边缘骨丢失。数据用SPSS软件进行统计学分析。P值小于0.05被认为具有显著性。
通过一期手术和二期手术植入的种植体近中和远中表面的平均骨丢失分别为0.76±0.04和0.842±0.04mm。在上颌(0.860mm)和下颌(0.729mm)之间未观察到明显的边缘骨变化。此外,所有样本的P值均>0.05,表明牙槽嵴骨丢失无显著差异。
因此,一期手术技术可为牙种植体提供更好的美学和功能。两种方法在边缘骨丢失方面无显著差异。