两种不同方法修复颊黏膜缺损的临床观察  

Clinical observation of two different methods to repair the defects of buccal mucosa

作　　者：黎彦彬 张令达[1] 后军[1] 薛浩伟[1] 孙明[1] 胡玉坤[1] 

机构地区：[1]安徽医科大学第一附属医院口腔颌面外科,合肥230022

出　　处：《安徽医科大学学报》2015年第2期217-219,共3页Acta Universitatis Medicinalis Anhui

基　　金：安徽省科技厅2013年度重点科技项目(编号:1301043050)

摘　　要：目的：观察并比较自体带蒂颊脂垫瓣（ PBFPF）与异种脱细胞真皮基质（ ADM ）在修复颊黏膜缺损中的临床效果。方法选取颊黏膜病损切除后需修补患者共46例,随机分为PBFPF组和ADM组。观察并记录两组患者术前及术后1~6个月最大开口度（ MMO）、手术修复时间等,并结合患者满意度进行统计学分析。结果 PBFPF组术后1~3 d MMO均低于ADM组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；而术后1周至6个月两组MMO相比差异无统计学意义；两者手术修复时间相比,差异有统计学意义（ P〈0．05）；比较两组患者满意度,差异无统计学意义。结论两种方法均可满足颊部良性肿瘤及口腔中后部T2 N0 M0恶性肿瘤初次的治疗要求,ADM使用更加灵活。但受病例数限制,对于首次切除T2 N0 M0及以下恶性肿瘤首选ADM修复是否合适,还需进一步研究。Objective To observe and compare the clinical effect of PBFPF and ADM on repairing the defect of buccal mucosa. Methods Forty-six patients were randomly divided into two groups（ PBFPF and ADM） . The post-operative 1 to 6 months MMO, repaired time and patients’ satisfaction of two groups were observed, recorded and analyzed. Results The MMO was statistically less in the group ADM 1~3 days after surgery （P〈0. 05）. 1~6 months after surgery, statistically significant difference was not found in MMO between the two groups. The re-paired time between the two groups was statistically different （ P〈0. 05 ） . And there was no statistically significant difference in the two groups about satisfaction degree. Conclusion The ADM is more flexible of the two methods that successfully satisfy the need to treat buccal benign tumoers and malignant tumors（ T2 N0 M0 ） for the first time. Considering the limited number of samples, further study is required to prove the surgical treatment effect of ADM on repairing the disease（ T2 N0 M0 or T1 N0 M0 ） taking primary surgical resection.

关 键 词：颊脂垫 脱细胞真皮基质 颊部软组织 缺损修复 

分 类 号：R782.25[医药卫生—口腔医学]