人工合成骨聯(lián)合釉基質(zhì)蛋白衍生物（EMD）與單用EMD治療牙周骨內(nèi)缺損的療效比較：meta分析
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-04 06:29
【摘要】：目的:評價人工合成骨材料聯(lián)合釉基質(zhì)蛋白衍生物(EMD)對比單用EMD治療牙周骨內(nèi)缺損的療效。方法:在Pub Med,the Cochrane Library和EMbase檢索相關(guān)隨機臨床對照實驗的文獻(截止2015年11月)。主要研究指標為探診深度減少(PPD reduction)、牙周附著獲得量(CAL gain)、牙齦退縮增加量(REC increase)和缺損填充獲得量(defect fill gain)。結(jié)果:最終納入8篇文獻,根據(jù)隨訪時間的長短將納入的8篇研究分為了短期和長期隨訪時間兩個組。分析的結(jié)果顯示,在短期隨訪組(不超過一年),對于探診深度減少(PPD reduction)、牙齦退縮增加量(REC increase)和缺損填充獲得量(defect fill gain)這三個指標,人工合成骨材料聯(lián)合EMD組對比單用EMD組顯示了較好的療效,且差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。對于牙周附著獲得量(CAL gain)這個指標,兩組差異沒有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P=0.17)。在長期隨訪組(超過一年),對于探診深度減少(PPD reduction)、牙周附著獲得量(CAL gain)和缺損填充獲得量(defect fill gain)這三個指標,聯(lián)合治療法組顯示了較好的療效,且差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。但對于牙齦退縮增加量(REC increase)這個指標,兩組差異沒有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P=0.05)。結(jié)論:考慮到本meta分析研究的局限之處,人工合成骨材料聯(lián)合EMD對比單用EMD治療牙周骨內(nèi)缺損在療效上的優(yōu)勢不能完全被證實。
[Abstract]:Objective: to evaluate the efficacy of artificial bone material combined with enamel matrix protein derivative (EMD) in the treatment of periodontal intraosseous defect with EMD alone. Methods: literature on randomized controlled trials (as of November 2015) was retrieved from Pub Med,the Cochrane Library and EMbase. Main outcome measures: probing depth reduction of (PPD reduction), periodontal attachment (CAL gain), gingival retraction increased (REC increase) and defect fill acquisition (defect fill gain). Results: 8 articles were included. According to the length of follow-up, the 8 studies were divided into two groups: short and long term follow-up. The results of analysis showed that in the short-term follow-up group (no more than one year), there were three indexes: (REC increase) and (defect fill gain) for probing depth reducing (PPD reduction), gingival retraction. Synthetic bone material combined with EMD group showed a better effect compared with EMD group, and the difference was statistically significant (P0.05). There was no significant difference in periodontal attachment acquisition (CAL gain) between the two groups (P0. 17). In the long-term follow-up group (more than one year), the combined treatment group showed a better effect on the reduction of (PPD reduction), periodontal attachment, (CAL gain) and (defect fill gain), and the difference was statistically significant (P0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in increasing gingival withdrawal (REC increase) (P0. 05). Conclusion: considering the limitation of this meta analysis, the advantages of artificial bone material combined with EMD in the treatment of periodontal intraosseous defect can not be fully proved compared with the treatment of periodontal intraosseous defect with EMD alone.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：重慶醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R781.4
本文編號：2221287
[Abstract]:Objective: to evaluate the efficacy of artificial bone material combined with enamel matrix protein derivative (EMD) in the treatment of periodontal intraosseous defect with EMD alone. Methods: literature on randomized controlled trials (as of November 2015) was retrieved from Pub Med,the Cochrane Library and EMbase. Main outcome measures: probing depth reduction of (PPD reduction), periodontal attachment (CAL gain), gingival retraction increased (REC increase) and defect fill acquisition (defect fill gain). Results: 8 articles were included. According to the length of follow-up, the 8 studies were divided into two groups: short and long term follow-up. The results of analysis showed that in the short-term follow-up group (no more than one year), there were three indexes: (REC increase) and (defect fill gain) for probing depth reducing (PPD reduction), gingival retraction. Synthetic bone material combined with EMD group showed a better effect compared with EMD group, and the difference was statistically significant (P0.05). There was no significant difference in periodontal attachment acquisition (CAL gain) between the two groups (P0. 17). In the long-term follow-up group (more than one year), the combined treatment group showed a better effect on the reduction of (PPD reduction), periodontal attachment, (CAL gain) and (defect fill gain), and the difference was statistically significant (P0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in increasing gingival withdrawal (REC increase) (P0. 05). Conclusion: considering the limitation of this meta analysis, the advantages of artificial bone material combined with EMD in the treatment of periodontal intraosseous defect can not be fully proved compared with the treatment of periodontal intraosseous defect with EMD alone.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：重慶醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R781.4
【相似文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條
1 麗文;;美國FDA批準人工合成骨的置換應(yīng)用[J];國外醫(yī)學(xué)情報;2001年07期
2 寧漱巖,劉建國,徐莘香,孫凱,甘志華,景遐斌;人工合成骨科生物降解可吸收材料的細胞毒理學(xué)實驗研究[J];白求恩醫(yī)科大學(xué)學(xué)報;2000年05期
3 孫天勝,胥少汀;人工合成骨移植[J];國外醫(yī)學(xué)(創(chuàng)傷與外科基本問題分冊);2000年04期
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 劉陽;人工合成骨聯(lián)合釉基質(zhì)蛋白衍生物（EMD）與單用EMD治療牙周骨內(nèi)缺損的療效比較：meta分析[D];重慶醫(yī)科大學(xué);2017年
，本文編號：2221287
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/yixuelunwen/kouq/2221287.html
最近更新
教材專著
