上颌窦内提升术种植修复上颌后牙缺失的临床观察

目的:评价上颌窦内提升术并同期植入种植体在上颌后牙区缺失修复中的应用效果。方法:2008年至2010年共完成上颌窦内提升术并同期植入种植体临床病例20例。男12例,女8例,年龄18-65岁。术前CT示:牙槽嵴顶至上颌窦底距离为5-8mm,行上颌窦内提升术,平均提升上颌窦底高度3.8mm(2-5mm),共植入38枚种植体,种植体植入6个月后完成义齿修复。结果:所有患者术后未出现上颌窦炎症,一例术中窦膜穿孔,将种植窝放入明胶海绵,同期植入种植体完成种植手术,术后3天术区疼痛,无其他明显症状。38枚种植体平均负载18个月,种植体稳定,行使功能良好,未见明显骨吸收。结论:对于骨高度不足的患者,行上颌窦内提升术,并同期植入种植体的方法可靠,具有好的疗效,可扩大种植牙的适应症范围。     

上颌窦底内提升同期植入种植体的临床效果观察

目的:观察单纯上颌窦内提升术同期牙种植修复的临床效果.方法:上颌后牙区牙槽骨严重吸收的36例患者,种植区剩余牙槽骨高度为(5.9±2.1)mm,行单纯上颌窦内提升同期牙种植术,共植入42枚种植体,其中瑞士Straumann种植体22枚、韩国奥齿泰SSⅡ种植体13枚、法国安多健种植体7枚.术后3～4个月,行上部结构修复,同时观察种植体的稳定性和种植体周围骨结合情况.随访期(12.2±3.6)个月.结果:36例患者上颌窦底提升高度(2.83±1.12)mnl,41枚种植体成功负载,种植体稳定,骨结合状况良好,无不良自觉症状.1枚种植体术后5周脱落,脱落2个月后重新种植,成功负载.结论:单纯上颌窦内提升同期牙种植术能有效治疗上颌窦底牙槽骨高度不足的上颌后牙缺失,手术创伤小,操作简便,并发症少,近期效果满意.     

单纯上颌窦内提升术同期牙种植的临床应用

目的:研究单纯上颌窦内提升术同期牙种植修复上颌后牙缺失骨高度不足病例的临床疗效.方法:上颌后牙缺失病例50例.种植区剩余牙槽骨高度为(5.2±2.2)mm,行单纯上颌窦内提升同期牙种植术,共植入67枚Straumann SLA种植体.术后3～6个月上部结构修复,观察种植体的稳定性、种植体周围骨结合及骨量改变情况.随访期为(12.8±5.6)个月.结果:观察期内种植体的留存率为97.01%,65枚种植体成功负载,种植体稳定,骨结合状况良好,无不良自觉症状.术中4枚种植体发生上颌窦黏膜破裂,穿孔率为4.48%.术后当天与术后6个月X线显示上颌窦内种植体周围骨高度增加(2.5±1.3)mm,边缘骨丧失(1.1±0.7)mm.结论:单纯上颌窦内提升同期牙种植术能有效治疗上颌后牙缺牙区上颌窦底牙槽骨高度不足的牙缺失,对窦底骨高度极度不足(<4mm)亦有治疗可能.     

牙周炎患者上颌窦提升术同期牙种植的临床观察

目的：对牙周炎患者行上颌窦内提升术同期植入种植体的临床效果进行评价。方法：收集2007年7月～2013年7月因上颌后牙缺失的慢性牙周炎患者25例,行单纯上颌窦内提升术并同期植入种植体43枚,修复后随访观察6～70个月。结果：观察期内种植体总留存率97．67％,窦底提升高度≥6mm者种植体留存率为94．44％。42枚种植体成功负载,无松动或脱落。所有牙周炎患者在随访期内均未发生上颌窦炎症,曲面断层片显示种植体根尖部与窦底之间可见新骨生成,种植体周围骨整合良好,窦底提升后上颌窦底至牙槽嵴顶的骨量明显增加。种植体周围软组织健康,无炎症,牙周探诊龈沟出血指数（SBI）0—1度。结论：对剩余骨高度不足的慢性牙周炎患者,上颌窦内提升术同期植入种植体可获得满意的临床效果。     

上颌窦内提升植骨及同期牙种植术在严重上颌骨萎缩中的应用

目的:评价上颌窦内提升同期牙种植术在上颌牙槽骨高度严重不足的临床应用.方法:对25例上颌窦底牙槽骨剩余高度1.9-5.0mm(平均高度3.5mm)的牙缺失患者采用空心环柱形切骨锯在种植区切骨、取骨,用骨挤压器对上颌窦底提升后,将圆柱状骨芯研磨成颗粒后,将自体骨颗粒或混合羟基磷灰石的颗粒植入上颌窦底,再置入种植体,术后1、3、6、12、18、24个月后复查.结果:共29枚种植体植入,其中窦底提升5-8mm后(平均6.45mm)植入27枚,上颌窦穿孔后盖膜植骨同期植入2枚.分别植入18枚Replace和11枚Xive种植体,全部一期愈合,术后3-6月大部分病例的X线片显示种植体与新骨形成紧密的骨性结合,术后1.5-6月完成种植修复,效果理想.术后18-30月留存率100%.结论:上颌牙槽骨高度严重不足的病例中采用上颌窦内提升,结合原位取骨、植骨,同期牙种植的方法能有效解决上颌后牙区骨量严重不足时的牙种植问题.     

伴上颌窦囊肿的上颌窦底提升牙种植临床分析

目的:探讨囊液抽取法在伴有上颌窦囊肿的上颌后牙区,同期行上颌窦底提升与即刻种植的临床效果。方法 :收集伴有上颌窦囊肿且需行上颌后牙区种植术患者12例,术区剩余骨高度不足4 mm,共植入25枚种植体,术后3、6、12个月通过CBCT及临床检查,评价种植体骨结合情况。结果 :12例患者术后6~9个月行二期修复,其中9例囊肿完全消失,3例囊肿大小较术前明显减小,术后1年25枚种植体均正常行使咀嚼功能,且未发现异常松动,种植体骨结合良好。结论:在上颌后牙区行上颌窦底提升术,对于伴上颌窦囊肿的种植修复患者,在无副鼻窦炎症状的前提下,可仅对囊液进行抽吸,同期行上颌窦提升与种植一期手术,能获得良好的骨整合效果。     

上颌窦内提升同期种植的临床应用

目的评价使用骨挤压器行上颌窦内提升术同期植入XIVE种植体的临床效果。方法27例37侧上颌后牙缺失患者，因牙槽骨高度不足，采用上颌窦内提升术植骨，同期植入XIVE种植体42枚。术后4-6个月行种植义齿修复。结果全部种植体植入后伤口一期愈合，无上颌窦炎发生，义齿修复后行使咀嚼功能12～36个月，41枚种植体稳定，1枚种植体二期手术时松动拔除。结论上颌窦内提升术创伤小，操作简便，对上颌后牙区牙槽骨高度不足者可以使用，经上颌窦内提升植骨同期植入XIVE种植体，短期观察成功率高。     

Bicon短种植体在上颌后牙区骨量不足病例中的临床应用

目的：评估Bicon短种植体在上颌后牙区骨高度不足病例种植修复的临床效果。方法：选择上颌后牙区骨高度1．7—8ram的病例62例,共植入Bicon短种植体252枚,其中植入长度6ram的种植体192枚,长度8mm的种植体60枚。其中上颌窦区牙槽骨高度不足的患者行经牙槽嵴上颌窦底提升术同期植入种植体,部分植体使用上颌窦基台固位。3—6个月后完成永久修复。结果：62例252枚Bicon短种植体均获得了良好的骨结合,9—26个月的随访观察及X光片和牙科CT检查,临床效果良好,种植体周围骨组织稳定。结论：Bicon短种植体在上颌后牙区骨量不足病例种植修复中临床效果肯定。     

上颌后牙区不同剩余骨高度行经牙槽嵴顶提升术同期植入种植体的临床效果研究

目的 探讨上颌窦底不同剩余骨高度(residual bone hight,RBH)行经牙槽嵴顶上颌窦底提升术同期植入种植体以及术中应用浓缩生长因子(concentrated growth factors,CGF)的临床应用效果.方法 纳入我院2014年1月至2017年12月上颌后牙区牙槽骨剩余骨高度不足患者38例,根据不同的RBH以及术中是否应用CGF将38例患者分为四组.A组:3 mm≤RBH<5 mm,经牙槽嵴顶上颌窦底提升术后同期植入种植体7例.B组:3 mm≤RBH<5 mm,经牙槽嵴顶上颌窦底提升术+CGF后同期植入种植体9例.C组:5 mm≤RBH<8 mm,经牙槽嵴顶上颌窦底提升术后同期植入种植体12例.D组:5 mm≤RBH<8 mm,经牙槽嵴顶上颌窦底提升术+CGF后同期植入种植体10例.种植术后即刻、6个月、12个月、24个月时复查CBCT检查种植体颈缘骨水平变化,窦底提升后骨高度变化,种植体骨结合及新骨形成的情况,有无种植体周围炎,种植体及修复体的稳定性,种植义齿的并发症.结果 38例病例无上颌窦炎症反应及上颌窦黏膜穿孔,种植体骨结合良好,永久修复后种植体及修复体稳定,术后一年种植体颈缘骨水平稳定.A、B组间,C、D组间种植体稳定系数(ISQ)的平均值在术后4个月和6个月差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).A、B组间,C、D组间在术后以及随访的24个月内的上颌窦底骨提升量差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),且应用CGF组窦底骨提升量分别高于A组、C组.结论 在3 mm≤RBH<8 mm时,经牙槽嵴顶上颌窦底提升术同期种植后可获得良好的骨结合,在术中应用CGF可促进上颌窦内提升同期种植后新骨形成,加快骨结合,有效增加窦底骨高度,增强种植体稳定性.     

经牙槽突上颌窦底提升术后成骨效果的CBCT观察

目的:研究经牙槽突上颌窦提升不植骨同期种植,种植体周围的骨量变化。方法:上颌后牙缺失病例42例,缺牙区剩余牙槽骨高度范围4.3～9.2 mm,经牙槽突上颌窦提升,不植骨同期种植,共植入51枚种植体。术前、术后即刻及术后3个月拍摄CBCT观察种植区的骨量变化,通过Mimics软件定量比较术后即刻与术后3个月突入上颌窦内的种植体表面的骨量变化。术后3～4个月行上部永久修复,随访6个月,观察种植体的存留率、并发症。结果:51枚种植体存留率为100%,术后上颌窦底提升范围1.00～4.62 mm,术后3个月突入上颌窦内的种植体表面被新生骨覆盖的面积平均值(10.31±2.35) mm2,平均新生骨覆盖率20.88%。结论:经牙槽突上颌窦提升术不植骨同期植入种植体存留率高,突入上颌窦的种植体可部分被新生骨覆盖。     

Anterior maxillary osteoplasty to broaden the narrow maxillary ridge

The application of endosseous implants has extended the range of options and effectiveness of reconstructive preprosthetic surgery. Placement of endosseous implants in the edentulous maxilla is often restricted due to lack of available bone. Exposure of the underlying anterior maxillary bone frequently reveals a ridge form which is adequate in height but too narrow to accommodate endosseous implants. A horseshoe type osteotomy extending from the ridge crest into the floor of nose has been developed which allows advancement of the outer cortex to restore lost facial form and placement of an interpositional bone graft and endosseous implants to restore lost function.     

Implant-supported maxillary overdentures retained with milled bars: maxillary anterior versus maxillary posterior concept--a retrospective study

PURPOSE: The aim of the present retrospective investigation was to evaluate implant-supported maxillary overdentures using either anterior (group 1) or posterior (group 2) maxillary implant placement. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Maxillary overdentures were planned with support by either 4 implants placed in the maxillary anterior region (group 1) or 6 to 8 implants placed in augmented maxillary posterior regions (group 2, bilateral sinus augmentation) and anchored either on an anterior or on 2 bilaterally placed milled bars. Cumulative implant survival rate, peri-implant conditions (marginal bone loss, pocket depth, Plaque Index, Gingival Index, Bleeding Index, and Calculus Index) and the incidence and type of prosthodontic maintenance were assessed and compared for the 2 groups. In addition, the cumulative survival rate for implants placed in grafted regions was compared with that of implants placed in nongrafted regions. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients (16 for group 1 and 18 for group 2) with 179 implants were available for follow-up examination after a mean period of 42.1 +/- 20.1 months. Four initially placed implants failed to osseointegrate and were replaced, but no further losses were seen during the loading period, for a 5-year cumulative implant survival rate of 978%. No differences in implant survival rates were seen between either the group-1 (98.4%) and group-2 (97.4%) concepts or nongrafted (98.0%) and grafted (97.5%) implants. The peri-implant parameters showed a healthy soft tissue, good oral hygiene, and an acceptable degree of peri-implant marginal bone loss. The rigid fixation of all overdentures was associated with a low incidence of prosthodontic maintenance, without any significant differences between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In well-planned overdenture treatment programs, a high survival rate and excellent peri-implant conditions can be achieved for implants placed in the anterior or posterior maxilla. Rigid anchorage of maxillary overdentures either on an extended anterior milled bar or on 2 bilateral posterior milled bars provides for a low incidence of prosthodontic maintenance.     

伴上颌窦囊肿或慢性上颌窦炎的上颌窦底外提升术效果评价

目的探讨伴上颌窦囊肿或慢性上颌窦炎的经外侧壁开窗上颌窦底提升术同期牙种植的治疗效果。 方法从2014年3月至2018年3月期间在广州市海珠区口腔医院种植修复科以及口腔外科诊治的行经外侧壁开窗的上颌窦底提升术同期牙种植的患者共53例种植体，根据文献报道的纳入标准，分为三组，可进行上颌窦底提升术的伴上颌窦囊肿者为囊肿组共17例，可进行上颌窦底提升术的伴有慢性上颌窦炎者为炎症组共15例，上颌窦内无明显炎症或囊肿者为正常对照组共21例。术前记录上颌窦黏膜厚度，上颌窦底剩余牙槽骨高度（RBH），术中记录有无上颌窦黏膜撕裂、破裂。术后7 d记录术后并发症情况，定期随访，在修复后12个月记录分析上颌窦内成骨高度（SBG）、种植体尖端成骨高度（ABH）、种植体边缘骨吸收（MBL）、上颌窦囊肿变化或上颌窦黏膜增厚情况。使用SPSS 20.0进行数据统计分析。术后急性感染比较使用卡方检验中Fisher精确检验，三组间的上颌窦黏膜厚度、上颌窦内成骨、边缘骨吸收等指标使用单因素方差分析进行差异比较，术前、术后囊肿直径和上颌窦黏膜厚度对比使用配对t检验。 结果三组病例术中均未出现上颌窦黏膜撕裂。囊肿组2例、炎症组3例、对照组1例出现术后急性上颌窦炎，三组间急性炎症例数差异无统计学意义（χ² = 2.049，P = 0.352）。三组病例均无术后上颌窦积血、积液等情况。修复后12个月，囊肿组SBG为（8.09 ± 1.20）mm，炎症组SBG为（7.17 ± 1.18）mm，对照组SBG为（7.36 ± 1.41）mm，组间比较差异无统计学意义（F = 2.409，P = 0.100）；囊肿组ABH为（1.94 ± 1.34）mm，炎症组ABH为（1.40 ± 1.12）mm，对照组ABH为（2.10 ± 1.30）mm，组间差异无统计学意义（F = 1.382，P = 0.261）；囊肿组MBL为（0.53 ± 0.70）mm，炎症组MBL为（0.47 ± 0.92）mm，对照组MBL为（0.48 ± 0.67）mm，组间差异无统计学意义（F = 0.118，P = 0.889）。囊肿组术后囊肿直径[（2.35 ± 3.51）mm]较术前的囊肿直径[（8.41 ± 3.04）mm]有所缩小，差异有统计学意义（t = 5.216，P<0.001）。炎症组术后黏膜厚度[（6.27 ± 2.15）mm]较术前厚度[（5.27 ± 1.58）mm]有所增加，差异有统计学意义（t = -2.562，P = 0.023）。 结论伴上颌窦囊肿或慢性上颌窦炎的经外侧壁开窗的上颌窦底提升术同期牙种植可以取得较好的临床效果。     

Incidence of maxillary sinusitis following Le Fort I maxillary osteotomy

Twenty adult patients with maxillofacial discrepancies most amenable to correction by Le Fort I osteotomy were evaluated for the incidence of postoperative maxillary sinusitis. Before surgery, each patient was evaluated both radiographically, by Waters' projection technique, and subjectively, according to a brief questionnaire pertaining to sinus symptoms. Identical evaluations were carried out at three- and six-month intervals following surgery. The results show no increase in the incidence of maxillary sinusitis following Le Fort I osteotomy.     

Surgically-assisted maxillary expansion

A combined surgical and orthodontic technique for management of transverse maxillary deficiencies in mature patients is described and discussed. Special references are made to the surgical release of several circummaxillary articulations to facilitate the use of a fixed expansion device, and to the authors' addition of an osteotomy below the nasal spine, to ensure that the nasal septum remains independent of the maxillary segments. Indications for the use of this surgically-assisted maxillary expansion technique, and its advantages when compared with segmented surgical expansion, are also presented.     

Pediatric maxillary fractures

Pediatric craniofacial structures differ from those of adults in many ways. Because of these differences, management of pediatric craniofacial fractures is not the same as those in adults. The most important differences that have clinical relevance are the mechanical properties, craniofacial anatomy, healing capacity, and dental morphology. This article will review these key differences and the management of pediatric maxillary fractures. From the mechanical properties' perspective, pediatric bones are much more resilient than adult bones; as such, they undergo plastic deformation and ductile failure. From the gross anatomic perspective, the relative proportion of the cranial to facial structures is much larger for the pediatric patients and the sinuses are not yet developed. The differences related to dentition and dental development are more conical crowns, larger interdental spaces, and presence of permanent tooth buds in the pediatric population. The fracture pattern, as a result of all the above, does not follow the classic Le Fort types. The maxillomandibular fixation may require circum-mandibular wires, drop wires, or Ivy loops. Interfragmentary ligatures using absorbable sutures play a much greater role in these patients. The use of plates and screws should take into consideration the future development with respect to growth centers and the location of the permanent tooth buds. Pediatric maxillary fractures are not common, require different treatments, and enjoy better long-term outcomes.