3种修复方式修复游离端缺失的临床比较

［摘要］ 目的 探讨3种修复方式修复游离端缺失的特点及临床效果。方法 本组资料共181例，其中74例行可摘局部义齿修复，45例行精密附着体义齿修复,62例行种植义齿修复。随访6~60个月后，评价咀嚼效率、成功率、稳固性、患者满意率。结果 种植牙修复咀嚼效率93.5％、成功率98.4%、稳固率98.4%、满意率98.4%，精密附着体咀嚼效率88.8％、成功率91.1%、稳固率86.7%、满意率86.7% ，可摘局部义齿咀嚼效率78.4％、成功率82.4%、稳固率70.3%、满意率71.6%。结论 种植修复在游离端缺失的修复中具有明显的优势，精密附着体能获得较为理想的修复效果，可摘局部义齿修复效果均比前两者差。

Clinical comparison of three types of restoring methods for distal extension

Objective To investigate the characteristics and clinical effects of three methods to restore the distal extension.Methods The data included 181 cases,among which 74 cases were treated with removable partial dentures,45 cases with precision attachment dentures,and 62 cases with implant dentures.After a follow-up for 6~60 months,evaluation of review inspection items include masticating efficiency,success rate,solid rate and satisfaction rate.Results For implant denture restoration,masticating efficiency was 93.5%,success rate was 98.4%,solid rate was 98.4%,and satisfaction rate was 98.4%.For precision attachment dentures,masticating efficiency was 88.8%,success rate was 91.1%,solid rate was 86.7%,and satisfaction rate was 86.7%.For removable partial dentures,masticating efficiency was 78.4%,success rate was 82.4%,solid rate was 70.3%,and satisfaction rate was 71.6%.Conclusions Implant restoration has obvious advantages in the restoration of distal extension.Precision attachment dentures can acquire satisfactory effect.The effect of removable partial denture restoration is worse than those of the two former methods.