游离端缺失伴中度慢性牙周炎患者的三种修复方案临床效果比较

Clinical effects of three types of removable restorations on patients with conditions of moderate chronic periodontitis and distal-extension absence

目的:比较套筒冠、精密附着体与传统可摘局部义齿修复KennedyⅠ、Ⅱ类牙列缺损伴中度慢性牙周炎患者的临床效果,探讨老年患者可摘局部义齿的设计。方法:选取游离端缺失伴中度慢性牙周炎患者共190例,其中63例行圆锥形套筒冠修复,51例行精密附着体义齿修复,76例行可摘局部义齿修复。戴修复体后1、3、6、12、18、24、30、36个月复查,评价咀嚼效率、成功率、稳固性、患者满意率。结果:咀嚼效率依次为91.5%、86.8%、76.4%;成功率依次为96.4%、85.4%、79.1%;稳固率依次为96.4%、84.7%、68.3%;满意率依次为96.4%、84.7%、69.6%。咀嚼效率组间比较结果为X^2=6.38,P=0.03。结论:KennedyⅠ、Ⅱ类牙列缺损伴中度慢性牙周炎,套筒冠修复游离端缺失患者效果较精密附着体以及可摘局部义齿更为理想。

Objective： To compare the clinical effects of conical telescopic crown, precision attachment denture and conventional removable partial denture on patients with moderate chronic periodontitis and KennedyⅠ、Ⅱ dentition defects,and further explore the design of elderly patients with removable partial denture. Methods： 190 patients with moderate chronic periodontitis and distal-extension absence were recruited, including 63 cases of conical telescopic crowns（CTC）,51 cases with precision attachment dentures（PAD）, 76 cases of removable partial dentures（RPD）. Evaluation of masticatory efficiency, success rate, stability, patient satisfaction rate were performed during 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 months follow up, respectively. Results： The masticatory efficiency of CTC, PAD and RPD were 91.5%, 86.8%, 76.4%; the success rate96.4%, 85.4%, 79.1%; the stability rate 96.4%, 84.7%, 68.3%; the satisfaction rate 96.4%, 84.7%, 69.6%.Masticatory efficiency comparison results between groups is X^2=6.38, P =0.03. Conclusions： For patients with moderate chronic periodontitis and Kennedy Ⅰ、Ⅱdentition defect, telescopic crown denture shows a better performance compared to precision attachment and removable partial denture.