两种不同修复膜材料在牙种植中引导骨再生的临床研究

发布时间：2018-05-26 23:05

  本文选题：引导骨再生 + 胶原膜　； 参考：《南昌大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：目的:通过定性及定量研究海奥口腔修复膜和博特医用胶原修复膜引导骨再生术后的成骨效果,为临床国产屏障膜的推广提供一定的参考。方法:按纳入及排除标准选出符合需行引导骨再生种植修复患者120例,其中60例采用海奥口腔修复膜行引导骨再生术作为观察组A,另60例采用博特医用胶原修复膜行引导骨再生术作为观察组B,两组患者骨缺损区的骨移植材料均选用天博骨粉,通过观察比较两组患者术后的不良反应发生率及种植体保存率,植骨厚度、成骨厚度、植骨高度、成骨高度、水平骨生长效果、垂直骨生长效果及成骨有效率来评估引导骨再生的成骨效果。结果:1、一期术后观察组A有1例患者出现种植牙局部区域肿胀疼痛,观察组B有2例患者出现种植牙局部区域肿胀疼痛,并有1例出现种植区域创口裂开,两组患者不良发生率均较低(P≥0.05),且经对症治疗后症状均消失,未发现种植体松动或脱落,所有患者组织愈合良好。一期术后4-6个月X线及临床检查未见异常。2、一期术后4-6个月,观察组A成骨厚度、成骨高度、水平骨生长效果及垂直骨生长效果均显著高于观察组B(P≤0.01)。3、观察组A和观察组B引导骨再生后水平成骨有效率分别达98.33%和95%(P≥0.05),垂直成骨有效率分别达95%和91.67%(P≥0.05)。结论:1、海奥口腔修复膜和博特医用胶原修复膜均可应用于种植修复骨缺损的引导骨再生术中,术后不良反应率低、种植体保存率高、成骨有效率高及成骨效果好,可起到屏障缺损区周围的纤维结缔组织,引导新骨的再生,重建缺损的骨组织。2、海奥口腔修复膜引导骨再生术后的成骨效果明显优于博特医用胶原修复膜,值得推广。
[Abstract]:Objective: to study the osteogenic effect of Hailao oral repair membrane and Botte medical collagen repair membrane after bone regeneration, and to provide some reference for the popularization of clinical barrier membrane. Methods: according to the criteria of inclusion and exclusion, 120 patients with guided bone regeneration were selected. Among them, 60 cases were treated by guided bone regeneration with Haile oral repair membrane as observation group, the other 60 cases were treated with Bot medical collagen repair membrane as observation group B, the bone graft materials of bone defect area of both groups were all made of Tianbo bone powder. The incidence of adverse reactions and the survival rate of implants, the thickness of bone graft, the height of osteogenesis and the effect of horizontal bone growth were observed and compared between the two groups. Vertical bone growth and osteogenic efficiency were used to evaluate the osteogenic effect of guided bone regeneration. Results one patient in observation group A had local swelling and pain in implant region, two patients in group B had swelling pain in local region of implant tooth, and one patient in group A had local swelling pain of implant tooth, and one patient in group B had fracture of implant area. The incidence of adverse events in the two groups was lower than that in the control group (P 鈮，

本文编号：1939302