根面覆盖的不同术式效果比较  

Comparison of Efficacy among Different Surgical Root Coverage Methods

作　　者：朱琼[1] 于春梅[1] 郑喜璇[1] 

机构地区：[1]佛山市第一人民医院口腔医学中心,广东佛山528000

出　　处：《华西医学》2016年第9期1551-1553,共3页West China Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的 对比侧向转位瓣术（LSF）、上皮下结缔组织移植术（CTG）和无细胞真皮基质（ADM）移植术这3种不同的根面覆盖手术方法半年内的疗效。方法 选择2012年12月-2015年7月于门诊就诊的18例牙龈退缩患者,共24颗患牙,按一定顺序分为3组,每组8颗患牙,分别采用LSF、CTG和ADM移植术进行治疗。分别记录基线时和术后6个月时的牙龈退缩量、探诊深度和角化龈宽度,组内和组间均进行比较。结果 3种术式治疗前后龈退缩和角化龈宽度都有明显的变化,龈退缩减少幅度均值为2.8~4.0 mm（P〈0.01）。其中CTG和ADM移植术移植对探诊深度改变较大,都明显减少（P〈0.01）;而LSF对探诊深度的影响不明显（P〉0.05）。3种术式之间的比较在治疗前后差异均有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论 LSF、CTG和ADM移植术都是根面覆盖的有效术式。在6个月内,CTG优于ADM,ADM优于LSF,差异明显。Objective To compare the half-year clinical efficacy of three different surgical root coverage methods including lateral sliding flap （LSF）, subepithelial connective tissue graft （CTG） and acellular dermal matrix allograft （ADM）. Methods Eighteen patients （24 teeth） with gingival recession treated in our hospital between December 2012 and July 2015 were selected and divided into three groups according to a certain sequence with 8 teeth in each group. The three groups of teeth were treated with LSF, CTG and ADM respectively. Gingival recession, probing depth and keratinized gingival width at both baseline and 6 months after surgery of all patients were recorded for inner- and inter- group comparison, Results All three methods proved to be effective within 6 months with an awerage of 2.8-4.0 mm in decrease extent of gingival recession （P 〈 0.01）. LSF did not significantly change the probing depth （P 〉 0.05） as the other two did （P 〈 0.01）. The differences among three surgical methods compared before and after surgery were all significant （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusions LSF, CTG and ADM are all effective surgical means for root coverage. Within 6 months, CTG presents better effects than ADM, and ADM better than LSF.

关 键 词：侧向转位瓣术 上皮下结缔组织移植术 无细胞真皮基质移植术 根面覆盖 膜龈手术 

分 类 号：R781.4[医药卫生—口腔医学]