2种不同种植体植入对种植体周围软组织的影响

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2022.03.016

上海口腔医学 ›› 2022, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (3): 305-308.doi: 10.19439/j.sjos.2022.03.016

2种不同种植体植入对种植体周围软组织的影响

曹伟玉¹, 曹捷¹, 刘宾益², 徐舟¹

1.上海市普陀区眼病牙病防治所口腔修复科,2.预防科,上海 200060

收稿日期:2022-04-11 修回日期:2022-04-28 出版日期:2022-06-25 发布日期:2022-07-07
通讯作者: 徐舟,E-mail: 1249308781@qq.com
作者简介:曹伟玉（1986-）,女,本科,主管技师,E-mail: cweiyu0316@126.com

Effects of two implant systems on peri-implant soft tissue

CAO Wei-yu¹, CAO Jie¹, LIU Bin-yi², XU Zhou¹

1. Department of Prosthodontics, 2. Department of Preventive Dentistry, Dental and Ophthalmic Clinic of Putuo District. Shanghai 200060, China

Received:2022-04-11 Revised:2022-04-28 Online:2022-06-25 Published:2022-07-07

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的: 研究2种种植体对种植体周围软组织的影响。方法: 选择2020年12月—2021年2月普陀区眼病牙病防治所收治的单颗后牙缺失且需行种植修复的患者40例,其中植入骨水平种植体10例,软组织水平种植体30例。在完成种植冠修复当天、3个月、6个月及12个月时比较2组种植体的探诊深度,检测种植体龈沟液中天冬氨酸转氨酶（AST）和碱性磷酸酶（ALP）水平。采用SPSS 17.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果: 修复完成当天、3个月、6个月及12个月,软组织水平种植体的探诊深度和ALP水平均显著低于骨水平种植体（P<0.05）。其中修复完成当天,软组织水平种植体的AST显著低于骨水平种植体（P<0.05）。随着时间增加,骨水平种植体龈沟液中的AST迅速降低,最后与软组织水平种植体接近（P>0.05）。结论: 尽管骨水平种植体和软组织水平种植体均具有良好的临床使用效果,但软组织水平种植体周围的软组织表现出更好的稳定性。

关键词: 种植体, 骨水平, 软组织水平, 牙周组织

Abstract: PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of different implant systems on peri-implant soft tissue. METHODS: Forty patients requiring single implant therapy in posterior teeth at Dental and Ophthalmic Clinic of Putuo District from December 2020 to February 2021 were selected. Ten patients were implanted with bone level implants and 30 patients with soft tissue level implants. Periodontal exploration was performed at the buccal side, lingual side, mesial and distal axial angle of the implants, and the gingival crevicular fluid of these locations were taken to detect the enzyme level. The probing depth, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) level of the two groups were compared at the day, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months after crown restoration. Statistical analysis was completed by SPSS 17.0 software package. RESULTS: The probing depth and ALP level of soft tissue level implants were significantly lower than those of bone level implants at the day, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months after crown restoration(P<0.05). At the day when crown restoration was accomplished, AST of soft tissue implant was significantly lower than that of bone level implant(P<0.05). AST in gingival crevicular fluid of bone level implants decreased rapidly in the following three time periods, and close to that of the soft tissue level implants(P>0.05) at last. CONCLUSIONS: Both bone level implants and soft tissue level implants have good clinical effects, but peri-implant soft tissues of the soft tissue level implants show better stability.

Key words: Implant, Bone level, Soft tissue level, Peri-implant soft tissue

中图分类号:

R783.4

曹伟玉, 曹捷, 刘宾益, 徐舟. 2种不同种植体植入对种植体周围软组织的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(3): 305-308.

CAO Wei-yu, CAO Jie, LIU Bin-yi, XU Zhou. Effects of two implant systems on peri-implant soft tissue[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2022, 31(3): 305-308.

参考文献

[1] Venkatakrishnan CJ, Bhuminathan S, Chandran CR, et al.Dental implants in patients with osteoporosis-a review[J]. Biomed Pharm J, 2017, 10(3): 1415-1418.
[2] Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Chrcanovic B.Long-term clinical outcome of implants with different surface modifications[J]. Eur J Oral Implantol, 2018, 11(Suppl 1): S123-S136.
[3] 王柏翔, 孟维艳, 周延民,等. 不同种植系统对种植体周组织影响的对比研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2014, 30(6): 540-543.
[4] 石倚天, 姒蜜思. 后牙区骨组织水平种植体与软组织水平种植体早期边缘骨吸收临床研究[J]. 浙江中西医结合杂志, 2014, 24(9): 765-767.
[5] Johar AO.Crestal bone changes around soft tissue versus bone level dental implant loaded with single crown: a randomized clinical trial[J]. World J Dent, 2019, 10(2): 84-87.
[6] Klokkevold PR, Johnson P, Dadgostari S, et al.Early endosseous integration enhanced by dual acid etching of titanium: a torque removal study in the rabbit[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2001, 12(4): 350-357.
[7] Tullio ID, Berardini M, Iorio DD, et al.Comparative evaluation among laser-treated, machined, and sandblasted/acid-etched implant surfaces: an in vivo histologic analysis on sheep[J]. Int J Implant Dent, 2020, 6(1): 7-14.
[8] Berglundh T, Zitzmann NU, Donati M.Are peri-implantitis lesions different from periodontitis lesions?[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2015, 38(Suppl 11): 188-202.
[9] Furuhashi A, Ayukawa Y, Atsuta I, et al.Soft tissue interface with various kinds of implant abutment materials[J]. J Clin Med, 2021, 10(11): 2386-2394.
[10] Abrahamsson I, Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T, et al.The mucosal attachment to titanium implants with different surface characteristics: an experimental study in dogs[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2010, 29(5): 448-455.
[11] Welander M, Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T.The mucosal barrier at implant abutments of different materials[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2008, 19(7): 635-641.
[12] 杨易, 周顺成, 何华春, 等. 口腔种植修复对牙列缺失患者生活质量及龈沟液AST、OPN水平的影响[J]. 中国口腔颌面外科杂志, 2019, 17(6): 531-534.
[13] Chiba FY, Sumida DH, Moimaz SAS, et al.Periodontal condition, changes in salivary biochemical parameters, and oral health-related quality of life in patients with anorexia and bulimia nervosa[J]. J Periodontol, 2019, 90(12): 1423-1430.
[14] Siadat H, Najafi H, Alikhasi M, et al.Effect of lateral oblique cyclic loading on microleakage and screw loosening of implants with different connections[J]. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects, 2018, 12(3): 183-189.
[15] Khajavi A, Mohseni S, Peymani A, et al.In vitro bacterial leakage at the implant-abutment connection of two dental implant systems with internal connection[J]. Front Dent, 2020, 17(1): 32-40.
[16] 王莺, 林野, 陈波, 等. 前牙区即刻种植和延迟种植软硬组织的保存比较: 临床研究[J]. 中国口腔种植学杂志, 2011,16(1):67-68.
[17] Costa FO, Takenaka-Martinez S, Cota L, et al.Peri-implant disease in subjects with and without preventive maintenance: a 5-year follow-up[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2012, 39(2): 173-181.

2种不同种植体植入对种植体周围软组织的影响

Effects of two implant systems on peri-implant soft tissue

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

本文评价

[1]	连梅菲, 张修银, 唐天弘, 忻贤贞. 数字化配准法测量种植体植入精度分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(3): 287-291.
[2]	杨治洁, 唐庭, 刘堃, 张磊, 翟沁凯. 影响种植体生存时间的相关因素分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(3): 292-297.
[3]	卢雨桐, 史俊宇, 赖红昌. Astra锥形种植体在上颌窦穿牙槽嵴顶提升术中的短期效果评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(3): 302-307.
[4]	杨晶晶, 毛卫华, 余正荣, 魏洪武, 郭水根. 短种植体随访7~9年的临床疗效及危险因素分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(2): 214-219.
[5]	谢雪梅, 张佳园, 张野, 俞晓佳, 刘李明, 王健, 于德栋. 龈沟液中sICAM-1、IL-1β和HIF-1α水平与义齿种植修复并发种植体周围炎的关系[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(1): 47-51.
[6]	徐晓乾, 李镭. 种植义齿生物学并发症危险因素的回顾性分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(1): 69-74.
[7]	胡宁, 李凤丹, 江银华. 植骨与否对上颌窦底内提升同期种植术临床疗效的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(1): 101-104.
[8]	王艳红, 叶明福, 刘帆. 血竭提取物对牙龈炎大鼠牙周组织修复及TLR4/NF-κB信号通路的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(6): 602-606.
[9]	刘好好, 胡苡, 张晨, 陈美华. 角化龈宽度对牙周组织再生术治疗骨下缺损临床效果的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(5): 507-511.
[10]	涂慧娟, 李凌宇, 李医丹, 罗真兰, 俞明. Er:YAG激光联合引导骨再生治疗种植体周围炎伴骨缺损效果评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(4): 418-422.
[11]	吕晓蕾, 史俊宇, 钱姝娇, 赖红昌. 上颌前牙美学区单颗种植修复体应用角度螺丝通道系统基台和预成钛基台的短期临床疗效比较[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(4): 423-428.
[12]	刘芳, 李振, 谢小飞, 路晓淼, 张容秀, 徐丽, 张凯. 2种羟基磷灰石复合材料在上颌窦内提升术植骨同期植入种植体中的临床效果[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(3): 265-269.
[13]	刘维佳, 唐镇, 张琦, 姜莉萍. 低能量微波照射对大鼠正畸牙移动及牙周组织改建的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(2): 156-161.
[14]	石俊, 关振群, 王训霞. 种植体黏膜与种植体乳头水平及周围软组织稳定性的关系探讨[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(1): 75-78.
[15]	段咏华, 俞敏, 潘亮, 林华俊, 郭美玲. 单纯种植体与天然牙联合种植体的临床修复效果及影响因素分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(1): 84-88.