检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:郭照中[1] 杨旭[1] 张恒[1] 黄继红[1] 肖莉[1] 袁春霞[1] 刘学[1]
机构地区:[1]广东医学院附属南山医院口腔科,广东深圳518052
出 处:《南昌大学学报(医学版)》2010年第11期54-56,59,共4页Journal of Nanchang University:Medical Sciences
摘 要:目的评价Xive和Ankylos 2种种植系统在临床应用中的优缺点。方法选择527例采用Xive种植系统和82例采用Ankylos种植系统的单冠种植体患者,进行潜入式种植手术,Ⅰ期术后4~6个月,Ⅱ期术后2周,全部采用金钯合金烤瓷冠修复。结果取印模修复时,Xive、Ankylos种植体成功率分别为98.5%、97.6%。修复后1年Xive、Ankylos的修复成功率分别为98.8%、100.0%。Xive种植体牙槽骨边缘骨吸收在修复即刻和修复后1年时分别为-0.32(-0.40~0.00)mm和-0.12(-0.18~0.00)mm,Ankylos分别为0.08(-0.15~0.12)mm和0.40(0.10~0.62)mm。结论 2种种植系统各有优缺点,根据患者的临床特点选择合适的系统可取得满意的疗效。Objective To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of Xive and Ankylos implant systems in clinical application.Methods Five hundred and twenty-seven patients were treated with Xive implants and 82 patients with Ankylos implants for single crown restorations.Au-Pd alloys were used for metal-ceramic restorations 4 to 6 months after Ⅰ-stage operation and 2 weeks afterⅡ-stage operation.Results At the second stage of operation,the implant survival rate was 98.5% for Xive and 97.6% for Ankylos.After 12 months,the restorative success rate was 98.8% for Xive and 100.0% for Ankylos.At the second stage of operation and 12 months after restorations,the marginal bone loss for Xive was-0.32(-0.40-0.00)mm and-0.12(-0.18-0.00)mm,respectively,and the marginal bone loss for Ankylos was 0.08(-0.15-0.12)mm and 0.40(0.10-0.62)mm,respectively.Conclusion Each of the two implant systems has its advantages and disadvantages.In order to get satisfactory clinical results,appropriate implant systems should be selected according to the clinical characteristics of patients.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.30