【摘要】：目的:在上頜前牙區(qū)單個(gè)缺失牙患者種植義齒修復(fù)中,采用不同軟組織處理方式對(duì)種植義齒修復(fù)后的軟組織美學(xué)效果進(jìn)行觀察和分析,用紅色美學(xué)指數(shù)(Pink Esth etic Score,PES)評(píng)價(jià)三種軟組織處理方式在上頜前牙區(qū)的應(yīng)用范圍、成功率、美學(xué)效果及其他相關(guān)因素。方法:選擇2011年9月至2013年6月在青島大學(xué)附屬醫(yī)院口腔種植中心進(jìn)行種植義齒修復(fù)的30例患者作為研究對(duì)象進(jìn)行回顧性分析。隨機(jī)分為三組,A組為唇側(cè)黏骨膜瓣滑行組,B組為腭黏膜下結(jié)締組織瓣移植組,C組為唇側(cè)ADM骨膜下植入組,種植義齒負(fù)載半年后按一定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)拍攝口內(nèi)照片,兩位觀察者用紅色美學(xué)指數(shù)(pink esthetic score,PES)評(píng)估口內(nèi)照片中種植體周軟組織各項(xiàng)得分。分組進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)分析,分析不同軟組織處理與PES值之間的關(guān)系。結(jié)果:種植義齒負(fù)載半年后三組種植體留存率均為100%;A組PES平均9.57(±2.10)分,B組PES平均為10.77(±2.56)分,C組PES平均為10.14(±2.32)分,B組及C組種植義齒修復(fù)后PES值較A組PES值高(P0.05)。B組與C組之間P ES值無(wú)顯著性差異(P0.05)結(jié)論:在上頜前牙美學(xué)區(qū)進(jìn)行單牙種植修復(fù)時(shí),采取異種脫細(xì)胞真皮基質(zhì)骨膜下植入及腭黏膜下結(jié)締組織瓣移植,可以改善種植區(qū)唇側(cè)的美學(xué)效果。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe and analyze the aesthetic effect of implant denture in patients with single missing teeth in maxillary anterior region by using different soft tissue treatments. The application range, success rate, aesthetic effect and other related factors of three soft tissue management methods in maxillary anterior teeth were evaluated by red aesthetic index (Pink Esth etic Score,PES). Methods: from September 2011 to June 2013, 30 patients who were treated with implant prosthesis in the oral implant center of affiliated hospital of Qingdao University were retrospectively analyzed. Three groups were randomly divided into three groups: group A, group B: subpalatal connective tissue flap transplantation, group C, subperiosteal implantation of labial ADM, intraoral photographs were taken according to certain standards after implant denture was loaded for half a year. The two observers used the red aesthetic index (pink esthetic score,PES) to assess the scores of periimplant soft tissue in intraoral photographs. Statistical analysis was carried out to analyze the relationship between different soft tissue processing and PES value. Results: the retention rate of implants was 9.57 (鹵2.10) in group A, 10.77 (鹵2.56) in PES of group B and 10.14 (鹵2.32) in group C after implant denture loading. The PES value of group B and group C was higher than that of group A (P0.05). There was no significant difference in P ES between the two groups (P0.05) conclusion: in the aesthetic area of maxillary anterior teeth, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix subperiosteal implantation and palatine submucosal connective tissue flap transplantation can improve the aesthetic effect of labial side.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：青島大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：R783.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 潘在興;陳小華;葉起清;陳楓;莊玉蘭;;上頜前牙種植美學(xué)修復(fù)的臨床研究[J];中國(guó)口腔種植學(xué)雜志;2006年04期

2 梁星;劉蝶;;種植義齒牙齦美學(xué)[J];中國(guó)實(shí)用口腔科雜志;2008年06期

，

本文編號(hào)：2281482