磁性附着体在单颌全口覆盖义齿中的5年临床效果观察

目的：研究磁性附着体在单颌全口覆盖义齿中的临床修复效果。方法：20例患者，单颌选择1-4个基牙放置磁性附着体制作全口覆盖义齿，其中上颌全口覆盖义齿患者5例，下颌全口覆盖义齿患者15例，共采用41个磁性附着体。在修复后1个月、3个月、6个月、1年、2年、3年、4年及至今5年分别进行回访复查，主要观察固位体周围牙龈的健康状况，基牙松动度，继发龋，义齿的固位，稳定性，咀嚼效率的变化及舒适度。对义齿咀嚼效率的变化及舒适度衡量主要依赖患者的直接主观感受。结果：患者对义齿的舒适性和稳定性均表示满意，3个基牙出现松动，2个基牙出现继发龋，1个磁体脱落，其余良好。结论：采用磁性附着体的单颌全口覆盖义齿可以提高义齿的舒适性和稳定性。     

磁性附着体覆盖义齿修复的临床观察

目的：通过临床复查,观察评价Magfit磁性附着体覆盖义齿的中长期效果。方法：对北京大学口腔医学院修复科近7年应用磁性覆盖义齿修复的患者进行复查,共9l例患者,97副磁性覆盖义齿,144对磁性附着体,观察附着体和基牙以及义荫的情况。复查内容主要有附着体的适合性、表面性状、基牙健康状况以及义齿的完整性等。结果：大部分患者修复效果满意,84．7％的基牙松动度状况不变或好转,11．8％的磁体和6．9％的衔铁曾出现脱落,11颗基牙拔除或脱落,长期应用的附着体磨耗较明显,未见基牙继发龋坏。结论：Magfit磁性附着体能够改善总义齿和局部覆盖义齿的固位与稳定,提高患者满意度。临床上发现脱落、磨耗、义齿折断等问题,需要对症解决。     

“O”型圈附着体义齿与套简冠义齿对基牙牙根应力分布的研究

目的：分析比较“O”型圈附着体覆盖义齿与套筒冠覆盖义齿的基牙牙根应力分布特点。方法：应用三维有限元应力分析方法研究了“O”型圈附着体覆盖义齿与套筒冠覆盖义齿的基牙牙根应力分布特点。结果：垂直载荷下，柱核型“O”型圈覆盖义齿基牙牙根内综合应力峰值较套筒冠覆盖义齿牙根内应力峰值下降了66.7%，应力分布更均匀，斜向载荷下，两种覆盖义齿的基牙牙根内应力峰值均较垂直载荷时高，但应力分布规律与垂直载荷类似，结论：“O”型圈覆盖义齿可以传递到基牙及粘骨膜的He力并使应力峰值降低，有利于口腔软硬组织的健康。尤其适用于需要利用残根作为基牙及其牙牙周健康欠佳的患者。     

磁性附着体覆盖义齿用于晚期牙周炎患者修复的临床观察

目的：观察晚期牙周炎患者磁性附着体覆盖义齿修复后其基牙牙周状况。方法：10例晚期牙周炎患者27颗基牙采用磁性附着体覆盖义齿修复,检查并记录修复前、修复后1年和2年基牙菌斑指数、牙龈指数、牙周袋深度、牙槽骨高度和松动度,并进行统计学分析。结果：义齿修复后,基牙菌斑指数、牙龈指数、牙周袋深度均有增加（P〈0.05）,牙槽骨高度不变（P〉0.05）,松动度降低（P〈0.05）。结论：晚期牙周炎患者采用磁性附着体覆盖义齿修复具备可行性。     

覆盖义齿的远期疗效

覆盖义齿的应用日趋广泛,但长期使用后可能出现基牙的牙周病和龋坏等问题,众多的学者从多方面对使用覆盖义齿的患者进行了长期的观察,发现覆盖义齿的远期疗效与口腔卫生习惯和是否采取防龋措施等有极大关系。本文综述覆盖义齿远期疗效观察的方法及结果。     

MAGFIT磁性附着体的临床应用及疗效观察

目的：观察Magfit磁性附着体用于全口覆盖义齿和可摘局部覆盖义齿的修复疗效。方法：为20名患者制作31只Magfit磁性附着体，对义齿的固位，咀嚼和使用情况进行为期2年的随访观察。结果：31只磁性附着体均在正常使用，其义齿的固位力，稳定性，咀嚼功能良好，基牙健康。结论：Magfit磁性附着体能提高义齿的固位力及咀嚼效率，缩短义齿的适应期，保护基牙的健康，美观效果好，显著提高了义齿的修复质量。     

根面不同处理方法对覆盖基牙继发龋影响的研究

目的：探讨根面不同处理方法对覆盖基牙继发龋的影响。方法：应用2种不同方法处理基牙根面，行覆盖义齿修复牙列缺损。结果：自2002年以来以223个已完成根管治疗的牙作为基牙，对53例患者进行覆盖义齿修复，1年后随访，富士Ⅱ型玻璃离子水门汀临床疗效略高于金属顶盖；5年后随访，金属顶盖疗效高于富士Ⅱ型玻璃离子水门汀。结论：采用覆盖义齿修复牙列缺损是一种有效的保留患者牙槽骨的方法，采取金属顶盖处理基牙根面长期临床效果较佳，但要预防基牙继发龋以提高修复成功率。     

"O"型圈附着体义齿与套筒冠义齿对基牙牙根应力分布的研究

目的　分析比较“O”型圈附着体覆盖义齿与套筒冠覆盖义齿的基牙牙根应力分布特点。方法　应用三维有限元应力分析方法研究了“O”型圈附着体覆盖义齿与套筒冠覆盖义齿的基牙牙根应力分布特点。结果　垂直载荷下 ,桩核型“O”型圈覆盖义齿基牙牙根内综合应力峰值较套筒冠覆盖义齿牙根内应力峰值下降了 6 6 .7% ,应力分布更均匀 ,斜向载荷下 ,两种覆盖义齿的基牙牙根内应力峰值均较垂直载荷时高 ,但应力分布规律与垂直载荷类似。结论　“O”型圈覆盖义齿可以缓冲传递到基牙及粘骨膜的牙合力并使应力峰值降低 ,有利于口腔软硬组织的健康。尤其适用于需要利用残根作为基牙及基牙牙周健康欠佳的患者。     

�ع�������Ͳ�ڸ����������Ӧ���޸��ض�����������ȱ��7����Ч�۲�

目的观察截冠术与套筒冠覆盖义齿联合应用修复重度牙周炎患者牙列缺损的效果。方法对2005年3月到2006年3月武警广东公安边防总队医院口腔科收治的7例患重度牙周炎的牙列缺损患者,共51颗基牙,行牙周基础治疗和根管治疗后截冠,再按套筒冠的制作程序制作套筒冠覆盖义齿,随访观察。结果经过3年的随访观察,所有患者均主观评价义齿美观舒适,固位良好,咀嚼功能显著提高;临床检查7例患者的51颗基牙动度明显降低,所有基牙的动度在I度以内;X线检查患者基牙周围牙槽骨在修复后无明显吸收,牙周膜无明显改变,缺牙区牙槽骨无明显吸收。结论截冠术和套筒冠覆盖义齿联合应用是目前重度牙周炎患者牙列缺损的理想修复方法。     

覆盖义齿的远期疗效

覆盖义齿的应用日趋广泛，但长期使用后可能出现基牙的牙周病和龋坏等问题，众多的学者从多方面对使用覆盖义齿的患者进行了长期的观察，发现覆盖义齿的远期疗效与口腔卫生习惯和是否采取防龋措施等有极大关系。本文综述覆盖义齿远期疗效观察的方法及结果。     

下颌磁性附着体覆盖全口义齿患者满意度调查

目的调查患者对磁性附着体覆盖全口义齿临床效果的满意度。方法采用全口义齿满意度问卷对9例磁性附着体义齿患者进行调查分析并观察基牙临床情况。结果患者对磁性附着体义齿固位、稳定、咀嚼功能、语音功能、外观、舒适性、坚固性均较满意,以固位、稳定、外观的满意度为高;戴牙前后基牙的临床指标无明显变化。结论下颌磁性附着体覆盖全口义齿修复有效、可行。     

Effect of using soft liner on bone density around the abutments supporting complete lower overdenture.

The effect of lower acrylic overdentures lined with soft liner on bone density around the abutment was studied on 14 patients divided into two equal groups. Group I patients using lower acrylic overdenture lined with soft liner. The abutments selected in each patient were two canines and two posterior. Bone density was measured from periapical radiographs made at denture insertion and after one year of denture use, for each abutments, using an accurate densitometer. The results showed decrease in bone density in the crestal alveolar bone around the abutments through the one year study period. patient using superstructure lined with soft liner showed less bone density than those using acrylic overdenture. The results of these study reached the conclusion that the resiliency of soft liner reduces the load applied over the overdenture abutments and in turn reduces alveolar bone changes.     

磁性附着体在下颌全口覆盖义齿中的临床应用

目的：观察磁性附着体的临床应用效果。方法：用Ｍａｇｆｉｔ ＥＸ－６００磁性附着体为１０名患者制作下颌全口覆盖义齿,粘固磁体前后进行固体力和咀效率测试,并观察基牙情况,结果：粘固磁体后固位力及咀效率明显提高,观察的６个月内,基牙松动度和牙周指标明显好转。结论;磁性附着体对改善义齿的功能有显著作用。     

Influence of overdenture abutment tooth contour on the periodontium: a preliminary report

The effect of overdenture abutment tooth contour on plaque retention and periodontal health was evaluated in four patients over a 1-year period. Each patient had mandibular canines with similar periodontal support; however, one abutment was dome shaped while the other had 2 mm of natural peripheral root contour coronal to the ginvival margin. Eight parameters of periodontal health were measured, and no significant differences between different contours were observed after 1 year. Furthermore, irrespective of overdenture abutment contour, no deterioration in periodontal status occurred. Two subjects had significant wear of the overdenture abutments after 1 year. Further evaluation of more subjects over a longer period of time is indicated.     

磁性附着体在下颌全口覆盖义齿应用中常见的问题及处理

目的：观察磁性附着体应用于下颌全口覆盖义齿常见的问题，并探讨预防或解决的方法。方法：用Magfit EX系统为23名患制作下颌全口覆盖义齿，共制作磁性附着体57个，观察1～1．5年，了解使用中发生的问题。结果：57个磁性附着体有2个磁体脱落，1个根面板脱落，57个基牙5个发生龈缘炎，1个发生继发龋，游离端基牙远中骨吸收5例(以每一侧为1例计算)，23副下颌覆盖总义齿，3副折断，根面板及磁体未见明显腐蚀，磁力无明显减退。结论：Magfit磁性附着体适用于下颌覆盖总义齿，临床上常见的问题都能预防或对症处理。     

A 10-year report of a longitudinal recall of overdenture patients

Eighty-nine patients were evaluated longitudinally for a 10-year period to assess the periodontal health of overdenture abutments and the effectiveness of the overdenture treatment. Of the original group, 28 patients returned for the 10-year recall. Sixty-six of the 77 overdenture abutments were present. Seven of the 11 abutment teeth extractions were because of caries and four were the result of periodontal disease. Most of the abutments have progressively lost attached tissue. Other periodontal indices remained fairly constant. Most of the patients were satisfied with the treatment even though the periodontal assessment was less than ideal.     

63副磁性附着体在全口覆盖义齿中的临床应用体会

目的:评价磁性附着体应用于全口覆盖义齿修复的效果。方法:用63副Magfit和Magdisc磁性附着体为28例牙列缺损患者进行覆盖义齿修复,并随访观察2年。结果:63副磁性附着体中1副失败,9颗基牙出现龈缘炎,未发现继发龋、基牙松动、义齿折裂、根面板脱落;所有覆盖义齿固位效果满意。结论:Magfit和Magdisc磁性附着体能有效改善覆盖义齿的固位,并发症少,具有较好的应用前景。     

Management of misangulated implants for a maxillary overdenture with spherical abutments: a clinical report

Misangulated and malpositioned implants pose a significant challenge for the prosthodontic treatment of edentulous patients. Most reports of maxillary overdenture patients have described the use of a bar to splint malaligned implants, followed by successful fabrication of the prosthesis. Few reports have discussed the use of individual abutments in such situations. This clinical report describes the successful use of spherical/ball abutments for the management of 4 malaligned implants in the edentulous maxilla for an overdenture. The rationale and technique for the use of spherical abutments for overdenture fabrication in such situations are described.     

A prospective randomized clinical study comparing implant-supported fixed prostheses and overdentures in the edentulous mandible: prosthodontic production time and costs

PURPOSE: This work compared implant-supported fixed prostheses and overdentures in the edentulous mandible in a randomized prospective study of treatment results, clinical working hours, laboratory working hours, and laboratory costs including materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventeen subjects agreed to participate. Three standard Br?nemark implants were placed between the mental foramina in each patient. After the connection of standard abutments, subjects were randomly assigned to the fixed prosthesis group (n = 11) or overdenture group (n = 6). Subjects in the fixed group were provided with prostheses according to the All-in-One concept. Subjects in the overdenture group received a conventional denture retained by a Dolder bar system. RESULTS: One implant was lost in the fixed prosthesis group after 1 year. A new implant was placed, and the prosthesis was refitted. Mean clinical working hours were 3.1 in the fixed prosthesis group and 4.1 in the overdenture group. Mean laboratory working hours were 12.5 in the fixed prosthesis group and 7.7 in the overdenture group. Total laboratory costs, including materials, were on average about 1,700 US dollars for the fixed prosthesis and 1,350 US dollars for the overdenture. CONCLUSION: A fixed implant-supported prosthesis in the edentulous mandible could be provided at about the same cost as an overdenture using the method described. Provided that the early survival results prove to be long lasting, the choice between a fixed and a removable prosthesis need not be a matter of economy.     

A maxillary implant overdenture that utilizes angle-correcting abutments

Placement of dental implants to enhance complete denture stability and retention is a well-accepted treatment modality. Most implant overdenture abutments and related components require parallelism within approximately 10 degrees to function properly. Non-parallel implant placement as a result of flared maxillary bone may preclude the use of conventional implant overdenture abutments, requiring the use of costly custom abutments or bar prostheses. A case report is presented that illustrates the use of a new, 2-piece, angled overdenture abutment to accommodate non-parallel implant placement.