两种国产口腔修复膜在牙种植引导骨再生中的临床对比研究  

Clinical Comparative Study on Two Kinds of Domestic Oral Remediation Membranes in Guided Bone Regeneration of Dental Implantation

作　　者：薛妍[1] 陈婷[1] 梁振耕 谢莉莉[1] XUE Yan;CHEN Ting;LIANG Zhen-geng;XIE Li-li(Department of Prosthodontics, Hainan Provincial People's Hospital, Haikou 571100, Hainan,China)

机构地区：[1]海南省人民医院口腔修复科,海南海口571100

出　　处：《中国美容医学》2019年第3期125-128,共4页Chinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine

摘　　要：目的:评价比较博特医用胶原修复膜与海奥口腔修复膜用于牙种植引导骨再生(GBR)的应用效果。方法:按照随机数字法将2015年5月-2018年5月在笔者医院行牙种植GBR手术的240例患者分为博特组、海奥组与Bio-Gide组,每组80例,分别采用博特医用胶原修复膜、海奥口腔修复膜与瑞士Bio-Gide可吸收生物膜行GBR手术。比较三组患者的术后并发症、水平及垂直成骨有效率、植骨厚度及高度、成骨厚度及高度、水平及垂直骨生长效果。结果:博特组、海奥组与Bio-Gide组的术后并发症发生率分别为3.75%、5.00%、2.50%,三组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);博特组的水平成骨有效率与垂直成骨有效率分别为95.00%、92.50%,海奥组的水平成骨有效率与垂直成骨有效率分别为97.50%、93.75%,Bio-Gide组的水平成骨有效率与垂直成骨有效率分别为98.75%、96.25%,三组的水平及垂直成骨有效率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。三组的植骨厚度及植骨高度比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);海奥组与Bio-Gide组的成骨厚度、成骨高度、水平骨生长效果及垂直骨生长效果均明显高于博特组(P<0.05),两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:两种国产口腔修复膜用于牙种植GBR手术的成骨有效率及术后并发症与进口修复膜均无明显差异,海奥口腔修复膜的成骨效果与Bio-Gide可吸收生物膜相当,均明显优于博特医用胶原修复膜。Objective To evaluate the applicative effects of Bo Te medical collagen membranes and HeaL oral rehabilitation membranes in guided bone regenerationn(GBR) of dental implantation, in order to provide reference for the promotion of domestic rehabilitation membranes. Methods 240 patients underwent tooth implantation GBR which was divided into Bo Te group, HeaL group and Bio-Gide group according to random number table in our hospital from 2015.5-2018.5, 80 cases in each group. The Bo Te medical collagen membranes, HeaL oral rehabilitation membranes and Bio-Gide absorbable biofilms were used to carry out GBR operation in three groups,respectively.The postoperative complications, horizontal and vertical osteogenesis effective rate, thickness and height of bone graft, thickness and height of bone regenerationt, horizontal and vertical bone growth effects were compared between three groups. Results The occurrence rate of postoperative complications of Bo Te group, HeaL group and Bio-Gide group was 3.75%, 5.00%,2.50%, respectively, there was no statistical significance between three groups(P >0.05). The horizontal and vertical osteogenesis effective rate of Bo Te group was 95.00%, 92.50%, respectively, the horizontal and vertical osteogenesis effective rate of HeaL group was 97.50%, 93.75%, respectively, the horizontal and vertical osteogenesis effective rate of Bio-Gide group was 98.75%, 96.25%,respectively,there was no statistical significance between three groups(P >0.05).there was no statistical significance on thickness and height of bone graft between three groups(P>0.05). The thickness and height of bone regenerationt, horizontal and vertical bone growth effect of HeaL group and Bio-Gide group was significantly higher than that of Bo Te grou(P <0.05),there was no statistical significance between two groups(P >0.05). Conclusion The osteogenic efficiency and postoperative complication of two kinds of domestic oral remediation membranes in GBR operation was not significantly different from the imported remediation mem

关 键 词：牙种植 引导骨再生(GBR) 口腔 修复膜 国产 成骨效果 并发症 

分 类 号：R782.12[医药卫生—口腔医学]