磨牙区使用角度螺丝一体冠不同全瓷材料修复种植单冠：1年前瞻性半口自身对照研究

目的 评价种植体支持的角度螺丝一体冠不同全瓷材料修复单冠在随访1年后的临床效果。方法 纳入13例上颌或下颌磨牙区双侧对称缺失的患者,每例患者接受两侧种植治疗。同一患者使用相同尺寸的2颗种植体。3~6个月后采用角度螺丝通道一体全瓷冠修复,每例患者的修复体分为全锆组和传统组。戴牙后即刻和12个月后进行X线检查,记录患者对修复体使用1年后的美学、功能评分及并发症。采用SAS 9.4软件对数据进行统计学分析。结果 13例患者修复后12个月的种植体成功率为100%。美学评价与功能评价在全锆组和传统组无显著差异（P>0.05）。全锆组边缘骨吸收为（-0.117±0.157）mm,传统组边缘骨吸收为（-0.141±0.153）mm,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 在本研究范围内,磨牙区使用2种全瓷修复方式的螺丝通道一体冠临床效果良好,全锆冠与传统全瓷冠修复效果无显著差异。

Angulated screw channel restored with monolithic zirconia vs. porcelain-fused-to zirconia implant crowns: a prospective clinical trial in split-mouth design

PURPOSE: The objective of the present study was to compare the clinical performance of angulated screw channel restored with monolithic zirconia and porcelain-fused-to-zirconia implant crowns. MOTHODS: In a prospective, clinical, split-mouth trial, bilateral premolar or molar single gaps in 13 patients were restored with angulated screw channel with either monolithic (experimental group) or porcelain-fused-to-zirconia (control group). Patient's subjective evaluation, technical complications and crestal bone level change were recorded during a follow-up period of 12 months. SAS 9.4 software was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: No implant was lost during the follow-up period. Of the crowns in esthetic appearance, there were 10 (excellent)/3(acceptable) in the experimental group and 12 (excellent)/1(acceptable) in the control group (P>0.05). Of the crowns in function, there were 12(excellent)/1(acceptable) in the experimental group and 11(excellent)/2(acceptable) in the control group (P>0.05). Changes in bone crest level seemed to have no correlation with either monolithic crowns or porcelain fused to zirconia crowns（P>0.05）. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of our study, over a 12-month follow-up, angulated screw channel restored with monolithic and porcelain-fused-to-zirconia implant crowns shows comparable clinical and radiological results.