两种不同直径Ankylos种植体边缘骨吸收的比较研究

Comparative Analysis of Ankylos Implants with Two Different Diameters on the Marginal Bone-level Alterations

目的:比较3.5mm和4.5mm两种不同直径的Ankylos种植体用于修复单牙缺失的边缘骨吸收量。方法:临床选择50例单牙缺失患者,采用3.5mm和4.5mm Ankylos种植体各25例,行潜入式种植手术,Ⅱ期手术2周后,按照常规方法完成金钯合金烤瓷冠修复。术后随访,通过X线检查骨组织的吸收情况。比较3.5mm种植体和4.5mm种植体X线检查结果。义齿修复后的临床观察期为12个月。结果:全冠修复后,两组植体及修复体均未发生严重并发症,初期稳定性好,3.5mm种植体在修复即刻及修复后3、6、12个月的边缘骨吸收量分别为(0.53±0.46)、(0.58±0.42)、(0.64±0.40)、(0.78±0.35)mm,4.5mm种植体在修复即刻及修复后3、6、12个月的边缘骨吸收量分别为(0.33±0.24)、(0.35±0.26)、(0.41±0.28)、(0.51±0.29)mm。两组骨吸收量经检验存在显著性差异(P<0.05),均数排列为:3.5mm组(0.66mm)>4.5mm组(0.42mm)结论:在Ankylos平台转换结构中,肩台的宽度越大,即种植体的直径越大,种植体边缘骨吸收量越少。在牙槽骨宽度足够的情况下,尽可能选择宽径种植体。

Objective： To compare the marginal bone loss of Ф3.5mm and Ф4.5mm Ankylos implant system to restore the loss of single-tooth.Methods： Totally,50 cases with loss of single-tooth were investigated.25 cases used Ф3.5mm Ankylos implant and 25 cases used Ф4.5mm implant.All patients were routinely two-stagedly operated.They were restored by using platinum ceramic crown.All implants were followed up,and the marginal bone lossing were recorded through X-ray checking immediately after implant placement and 3,6 and 12 months after functional loading.Results： All implants were availale.No implant loss and complication occurred.The medians marginal bone loss of Ф3.5mm restoration immediate,3 momth,6 month and 1year after restoration was 0.53±0.46,0.58±0.42,0.64±0.40,0.78±0.35mm,respectively.The medians marginal bone loss of Ф4.5mm implants immediate,3 month,6 month and 1year after restoration were 0.33±0.24,0.35±0.26,0.41±0.28,0.51±0.29mm,respectively.The bone loss of two groups had significant difference（P0.05）.The medians marginal bone loss of Ф3.5mm implants was（0.66mm） greater than Ф4.5mm implants（0.42mm）.Conclusion： In Ankylos platform switching implant system,the extent of mismatching can control the marginal bone loss.Provided the width of alveolar bone is enough,we should choose the wider implant.