论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察C型和D型粘结固定桥修复下颌单个后牙缺失的临床效果,并对两者的临床疗效进行比较。方法:选择下颌单个后牙缺失并伴远端基牙向近中或舌侧倾斜的42例患者,分别采用C型和D型固位体粘结固定桥修复,两种固位型的修复体粘结后即刻、6、12和24个月随访观察,对修复体边缘适合性、X线片检查、患者主观感受和牙菌斑指数等进行评价。结果:牙菌斑指数:与修复前相比,两组病例近远中基牙在修复粘结后即刻、6个月无显著性差异(P>0.05),远中基牙修复12、24个月后存在显著性差异(P<0.05),近中基牙无显著性差异(P>0.05)。两组之间在修复后相同时间段比较均无显著性差异(P>0.05);0.5～2年复查:两组病例X线片显示基牙牙周膜间隙均无异常;C型修复组出现4例修复体松脱,1例不满意,2年总成功率为80.95%,D型修复组出现1例舌侧金属翼板松脱,2年总成功率为95.23%。结论:粘结固定桥D型临床疗效优于C型固定桥临床疗效,两种固位型粘结桥修复后牙周的维护都是很有必要的。
OBJECTIVE: To observe the clinical effect of C-type and D-type bonded fixed bridges in repairing mandibular single posterior tooth loss, and to compare the clinical curative effect of the two. Methods: Forty-two patients with missing mandibular single posterior teeth and distal abutment inclinations were treated with C-type and D-type ceped fixation bridges. Two types of retention type prosthesis Immediately after sticking, 6, 12 and 24 months after follow-up observation, the prosthesis marginal suitability, X-ray examination, subjective feelings of patients and plaque index were evaluated. Results: The plaque index: compared with before repair, the abutment teeth in two groups had no significant difference at 6 months (P> 0.05) There was significant difference between the two groups (P <0.05), but there was no significant difference in proximal abutments (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the same time after repair (P> 0.05); in 0.5 to 2 years of follow-up: the radiographs of the two groups showed no abnormality in the periodontal membrane space of the abutments; the C-type repair group appeared Four cases of prosthesis detachment, one case was not satisfied, two-year assembly rate was 80.95%, D-type repair group, one case of lingual metal wing release, 2-year assembly rate was 95.23%. Conclusion: The clinical efficacy of D-type cemented bridges is better than that of C-type bridges. Periodontal maintenance is very necessary after the two kinds of cemented bridges are repaired.