摘要
目的:比较Bio-oss和PepGen P15 Flow(简称P15)两种植骨材料在牙槽骨骨量不足患者种植修复中的临床应用效果。方法:选择上下颌前牙区单牙缺失且牙槽骨宽度不足患者30例,随机分成两组,A组植入Bio-oss植骨材料,B组植入P15植骨材料,两组均覆盖Bio-Gide胶原膜,并同期植入种植体,术后9个月复诊观察术区软组织情况,拍摄根尖片进行影像学观察,并行二期手术,测量牙槽嵴顶宽度。结果:两组种植体均存活,植牙区软组织愈合良好,根尖片显示种植体周围无透射影;两组牙槽嵴顶宽度均较术前增加,B组牙槽嵴顶宽度增加量大于A组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:Bio-oss和P15两种植骨材料应用于牙槽骨骨量不足患者的种植修复均具有良好的短期临床效果,后者成骨效果优于前者。
Objective： The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the clinical outcomes of two bone substitutes（Bio-oss and PepGen P15 Flow） on their application in the maxillar or mandibular alveolar bone defect patients.Methods： A total of 30 patients who was suffered from frontal single tooth missing with alveolar bone defect were chosen in the present research.The samples were divided into two groups,the bio-oss bone substitute was used in group A while the P15 bone substitute was used in group B,all the cases received implants at the same time.The soft tissue condition and the X-Ray result were recorded at the 9 mouths recall,alveolar bone width was measured during the second phase surgery.Results： All the implants survived,the soft tissue condition was healthy and there was no radiolucency around the implants.All the alveolar bone width increased,the mean quantity of group A was significantly higher than group B（P0.05）.Conclusions： The short-term clinical outcomes of Bio-oss and P15 bone substitutes are both satisfactory,while the later was better than the former.
出处
《赣南医学院学报》
2009年第6期893-894,共2页
JOURNAL OF GANNAN MEDICAL UNIVERSITY
