种植修复对慢性牙周炎牙列缺损患者牙周指数及炎性因子的影响  

Effect of Implant Prosthesis on Periodontal Index and Inflammatory Factors of Patients with Chronic Periodontitis and Dentition Defect

作　　者：周洋[1] 王飞[1] 王飞虎 陆靖雅 陈志慧 Zhou Yang;Wang Fei;Wang Fei-hu;Lu Jing-ya;Chen Zhi-hui(PLA Joint Logistics Support Unit 904 Hospital Department of Stomatolog,Wuxi 214000,China;Wuxi Second People’s Hospital Department of Stomatolog,Wuxi 214000,China;Wuxi Fifth People’s Hospital Department of Stomatolog,Wuxi 214000,China)

机构地区：[1]中国人民解放军联勤保障部队第904医院口腔科,无锡214000 [2]无锡市第二人民医院口腔科,无锡214000 [3]无锡市第五人民医院口腔科,无锡214000

出　　处：《湖南师范大学学报（医学版）》2021年第2期189-192,共4页Journal of Hunan Normal University(Medical Sciences)

摘　　要：目的:探讨种植修复对慢性牙周炎牙列缺损患者牙周指数及炎性因子的影响。方法:选择2016年7月~2017年6月收治的行种植修复的慢性牙周炎牙列缺损患者64例(72颗)为实验组,同期选择行种植修复的牙列缺损且牙周健康患者66例(78颗)为对照组。随访6个、12个月,比较两组患者临床疗效、牙周指数、牙龈沟炎性因子含量。结果:随访6个月,两组牙周缺损患者临床疗效比较,差异无统计学意义(93.06%vs 97.33%),实验组患者PIS、PD明显高于对照组[(2.26±0.21 vs 2.15±0.24)、(1.82±0.20 vs 1.67±0.18)mm],龈沟液hs-CRP、IL-1β、IL-6、TNF-α明显高于对照组[(12.15±2.32 vs 9.21±1.67)μg/mL、(2.24±0.45 vs 0.52±0.21)ng/mL、(3.12±0.65 vs 1.74±0.42)ng/mL、(14.36±2.24 vs 10.45±1.42)ng/m、](t=8.312,28.063,14.421,11.924);随访12个月,实验组有效率80.56%明显低于对照组92.00%,PLI、PIS、SBI、PD明显高于对照组[(0.98±0.15 vs 0.87±0.13)、(2.45±0.32 vs 2.20±0.26)、(1.23±0.20 vs 1.06±0.24)、(2.34±0.26 vs 2.06±0.32)mm],龈沟液hs-CRP、IL-1β、IL-6、TNF-α明显高于对照组[(17.54±3.40 vs 9.75±1.35)μg/m、(3.54±0.65 vs 0.56±0.12)ng/mL、(4.85±0.72 vs 1.82±0.54)ng/mL、(16.24±3.12 vs 11.33±2.20)ng/mL]。结论:种植修复治疗慢性牙周炎牙列缺损近期疗效较好,远期存在种植周围炎的患病风险,可能与慢性牙周炎所致炎症状态以及修复种植会刺激炎性因子释放等因素有关。临床应联合牙周基础治疗,以提高远期疗效。Objective To investigate the effect of implant prosthesis on periodontal index and inflammatory factors of patients with chronic periodontitis and dentition defect.Methods A total of 64 cases of patients(72 teeth)with chronic periodontitis and dentition defect admitted to hospital from July 2016 to June 2017 and undergone implant prosthesis were selected as the experimental group,and 66 cases of patients(78 teeth)with periodontal health and dentition defect and undergone implant prosthesis were selected as the control group.After follow-up visit for respective 6 and 12 months was made,the clinical efficacy,periodontal index and gingival sulcus inflammatory factors between the two groups were compared.Results After 6 months of follow-up visit,the difference in clinical efficacy between the two groups was not statistically significant(93.06%vs 97.33%).The PIS and PD in experimental group were significantly higher than those in control group[(2.26±0.21 vs 2.15±0.24),(1.82±0.20 vs 1.67±0.18)mm];the levels of hs-CRP,IL-1β,IL-6 and TNF-αin gingival crevicular fluid were significantly higher than those in control group[(12.15±2.32 vs 9.21±1.67)μg/mL、(2.24±0.45 vs 0.52±0.21)ng/mL,(3.12±0.65 vs 1.74±0.42)ng/mL,(14.36±2.24 vs 10.45±1.42)ng/m];after 12 months of follow-up visit,the effective rate in experimental group was 80.56% and significantly lower than 92.00% in control group,the levels of PLI,PIS,SBI and PD were significantly higher than those in control group[(0.98±0.15 vs 0.87±0.13),(2.45±0.32 vs 2.20±0.26),(1.23±0.20 vs 1.06±0.24),(2.34±0.26 vs 2.06±0.32)mm],the levels of hs-CRP,IL-1β,IL-6 and TNF-α in gingival crevicular fluid were significantly higher than those in control group[(17.54±3.40 vs 9.75±1.35)μg/m,(3.54±0.65 vs 0.56±0.12)ng/mL,(4.85±0.72 vs 1.82±0.54)ng/m2021-01-19,(16.24±3.12 vs 11.33±2.20)ng/mL].Conclusion Implant prosthesis has good short-term curative effect in treating chronic periodontitis and dentition defect,but it has the long-term risk of peri-implantitis,w

关 键 词：慢性牙周炎 种植修复 牙周指数 炎性因子 临床疗效 

分 类 号：R781.4[医药卫生—口腔医学]