牙周受损磨牙牙槽的牙槽嵴保存:组织学和1年临床试验的种植结果。

IF 4.8 1区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Yiping Wei, Anqi Tao, Wenjie Hu, Liping Zhao, Tao Xu, Yunsong Liu
{"title":"牙周受损磨牙牙槽的牙槽嵴保存:组织学和1年临床试验的种植结果。","authors":"Yiping Wei, Anqi Tao, Wenjie Hu, Liping Zhao, Tao Xu, Yunsong Liu","doi":"10.1111/clr.14459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the histological outcomes and 1 year implant treatment outcomes following alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in extraction sockets of periodontally compromised molars with and without primary wound closure.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Patients requiring molar extraction owing to severe periodontitis were allocated to one of the following groups: (1) ARP with primary wound closure (control group), and (2) ARP with minimally invasive open healing (test group). Six months after ridge preservation, trephine cores were harvested for histologic and histomorphometric analysis. Implants were then placed, and implant stability was measured immediately as well as 6 months after placement. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed after the final crown insertion and again at 1 year post-procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-nine patients (39 implants) completed the study. Histomorphometrically, based on 30 participants, the percentage of newly formed bone was 33.7% ± 16.0% and 30.5% ± 14.4% in control and test groups, respectively. Control and test groups showed no significant differences in primary and secondary implant stabilities. No statistically significant differences in any of the clinical measurements were detected between the two groups (p > 0.05). Marginal bone levels remained stable with minimal changes from crown placement to 1 year, measuring 0.32 ± 0.57 mm for the control group and 0.23 ± 0.31 mm for the test group. The survival rates of the implants were 100% in both groups at 1-year post-loading.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ARP with/without primary wound closure resulted in no significant differences in new bone formation and 1 year implant treatment outcomes.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-ONN-16009433).</p>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ridge Preservation in Extraction Sockets of Periodontally Compromised Molars With and Without Primary Wound Closure: Histological and 1-Year Implant Outcomes of a Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Yiping Wei, Anqi Tao, Wenjie Hu, Liping Zhao, Tao Xu, Yunsong Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/clr.14459\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the histological outcomes and 1 year implant treatment outcomes following alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in extraction sockets of periodontally compromised molars with and without primary wound closure.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Patients requiring molar extraction owing to severe periodontitis were allocated to one of the following groups: (1) ARP with primary wound closure (control group), and (2) ARP with minimally invasive open healing (test group). Six months after ridge preservation, trephine cores were harvested for histologic and histomorphometric analysis. Implants were then placed, and implant stability was measured immediately as well as 6 months after placement. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed after the final crown insertion and again at 1 year post-procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-nine patients (39 implants) completed the study. Histomorphometrically, based on 30 participants, the percentage of newly formed bone was 33.7% ± 16.0% and 30.5% ± 14.4% in control and test groups, respectively. Control and test groups showed no significant differences in primary and secondary implant stabilities. No statistically significant differences in any of the clinical measurements were detected between the two groups (p > 0.05). Marginal bone levels remained stable with minimal changes from crown placement to 1 year, measuring 0.32 ± 0.57 mm for the control group and 0.23 ± 0.31 mm for the test group. The survival rates of the implants were 100% in both groups at 1-year post-loading.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ARP with/without primary wound closure resulted in no significant differences in new bone formation and 1 year implant treatment outcomes.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-ONN-16009433).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14459\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14459","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较牙槽嵴保存(ARP)对牙周受损磨牙拔牙槽位的组织学结果和1年种植治疗效果。材料和方法:将因严重牙周炎需要拔牙的患者分为以下两组:(1)单纯创面缝合的ARP组(对照组)和(2)微创开放愈合的ARP组(试验组)。脊保存6个月后,摘取环钻核进行组织学和组织形态学分析。然后放置种植体,并立即测量种植体稳定性以及放置后6个月。在最后一次冠植入后和术后1年再次进行临床和影像学检查。结果:39例患者(39颗种植体)完成了研究。在组织形态学上,30名受试者中,对照组和试验组的新成骨率分别为33.7%±16.0%和30.5%±14.4%。对照组和试验组在一期和二期种植体稳定性方面无显著差异。两组患者各项临床指标比较,差异均无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。从冠植入到1年,边缘骨水平保持稳定,变化很小,对照组为0.32±0.57 mm,试验组为0.23±0.31 mm。两组植体1年后的成活率均为100%。结论:ARP伴/不伴一期伤口闭合导致新骨形成和1年种植体治疗结果无显著差异。试验注册:本研究已在中国临床试验注册中心注册(ChiCTR-ONN-16009433)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ridge Preservation in Extraction Sockets of Periodontally Compromised Molars With and Without Primary Wound Closure: Histological and 1-Year Implant Outcomes of a Clinical Trial.

Objective: To compare the histological outcomes and 1 year implant treatment outcomes following alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in extraction sockets of periodontally compromised molars with and without primary wound closure.

Material and methods: Patients requiring molar extraction owing to severe periodontitis were allocated to one of the following groups: (1) ARP with primary wound closure (control group), and (2) ARP with minimally invasive open healing (test group). Six months after ridge preservation, trephine cores were harvested for histologic and histomorphometric analysis. Implants were then placed, and implant stability was measured immediately as well as 6 months after placement. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed after the final crown insertion and again at 1 year post-procedure.

Results: Thirty-nine patients (39 implants) completed the study. Histomorphometrically, based on 30 participants, the percentage of newly formed bone was 33.7% ± 16.0% and 30.5% ± 14.4% in control and test groups, respectively. Control and test groups showed no significant differences in primary and secondary implant stabilities. No statistically significant differences in any of the clinical measurements were detected between the two groups (p > 0.05). Marginal bone levels remained stable with minimal changes from crown placement to 1 year, measuring 0.32 ± 0.57 mm for the control group and 0.23 ± 0.31 mm for the test group. The survival rates of the implants were 100% in both groups at 1-year post-loading.

Conclusions: ARP with/without primary wound closure resulted in no significant differences in new bone formation and 1 year implant treatment outcomes.

Trial registration: This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-ONN-16009433).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Clinical Oral Implants Research 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
11.60%
发文量
149
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Oral Implants Research conveys scientific progress in the field of implant dentistry and its related areas to clinicians, teachers and researchers concerned with the application of this information for the benefit of patients in need of oral implants. The journal addresses itself to clinicians, general practitioners, periodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists, as well as to teachers, academicians and scholars involved in the education of professionals and in the scientific promotion of the field of implant dentistry.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信