发生可能与CRP㊁WBC㊁SF㊁Hb㊁ALB有关㊂因实验室指标相对较为客观,故进一步对实验室指标感染预测模型进行建立,结果显示,CRP㊁WBC㊁SF㊁ALB水平是预测腹膜炎发生的血清学风险指标,且经ROC曲线分析验证,该模型预测价值较好,说明CRP㊁WBC㊁SF㊁
ALB水平可用于预测腹膜炎㊂
综上,尿毒症合并腹膜炎以革兰阳性菌感染为主,患者的低文化程度㊁长透龄㊁低RRF可能增加腹膜炎感染的风险,CRP㊁WBC㊁SF㊁ALB水平是预测腹膜炎发生的血清学风险指标,具有较好的感染预测价值㊂ʌ参考文献ɔ
[1]㊀Pope JE,Choy EH.C-reactive protein and implications in
rheumatoid arthritis and associated comorbidities[J].Semin
Arthritis Rheum,2021,51(1):219-229.
[2]㊀Tascini C,Aimo A,Arzilli C,et al.Procalcitonin,white blood
cell count and C-reactive protein as predictors of S.aureus
infection and mortality in infective endocarditis[J].Int Car-
diol,2020,15(301):190-194.
[3]㊀Mahroum N,Alghory A,Kiyak Z,et al.Ferritin-from iron,
through inflammation and autoimmunity,to COVID-19[J].
Autoimmun,2022,1(126):102778.
[4]㊀Eckart A,Struja T,Kutz A,et al.Relationship of nutritional
status,inflammation,and serum albumin levels during acute
Illness:a prospective sudy[J].Am Med,2020,133(6):713
-722.
[5]㊀潘阳彬,林贝多,戴宾宾,等.益生菌对腹膜透析患者营养
不良及腹膜炎发病率的影响[J].中国中西医结合肾病杂
志,2020,21(6):493-496.
[6]㊀Perl J,Fuller DS,Bieber BA,et al.Peritoneal Dialysis-Re-
lated Infection Rates and Outcomes:Results From the Perito-
neal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study
(PDOPPS)[J].Am Kidney Dis,2020,76(1):42-53.
[7]㊀马东红,曹子彧,吕玉敏,等.腹膜透析相关性腹膜炎危险
因素分析及预测模型建立[J].新乡医学院学报,2020,37
(12):1168-1172.
[8]㊀丁洁,李春庆,陈英兰,等.腹膜透析相关性腹膜炎病原菌
及其影响因素[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2020,30(20): 3099-3103.
[9]㊀张俊,陈颖.老年患者腹膜透析相关性腹膜炎的相关危险
因素及风险模型构建[J].老年医学与保健,2021,27
(6):1265-1268.
[10]㊀Bonnal H,Bechade C,Boyer A,et al.Effects of educational
practices on the peritonitisrisk in peritoneal dialysis:a retro-
spective cohort study with data from the french peritoneal
dialysis registry(RDPLF)[J].BMC Nephrol,2020,21
(1):205.
[11]㊀Zhou J,Diao X,Wang S,et al.Diagnosis value of combined
detection of serum SF,CEA and CRP in non-small cell
lung cancer[J].Cancer Manag Res,2020,22(12):8813-
8819.
[12]㊀黎秋芬,方祎,王曲倔,等.PCT㊁CRP㊁腹水乳铁蛋白及
LBP联合检测在自发性细菌性腹膜炎患者诊断中的临
床价值[J].标记免疫分析与临床,2019,26(3):477-
480.
ʌ文章编号ɔ1006-6233(2023)08-1318-07
浓缩生长因子联合Biooss骨替代材料应用于即刻种植
下颌后牙区骨缺失的价值
张宏波,㊀孙传锋,㊀张㊀洋
(安徽医科大学附属六安医院口腔科,㊀安徽㊀六安㊀237005)
ʌ摘㊀要ɔ目的:探究浓缩生长因子(CGF)联合Biooss骨替代材料应用于即刻种植下颌后牙区骨缺失的价值㊂方法:回顾性选取2019年6月至2022年6月于我院进行下颌后牙区即刻种植骨缺失患者101例,根据方案的差异将患者分组:对照组51例,观察组50例,对照组采用Biooss骨替代材料,观察组联用Biooss骨替代材料和浓缩生长因子,后6个月对患者进行电话及门诊随访,比较两组患者水
平及垂直植骨㊁成骨厚度及骨再生效果;根据患者术后稳定系数(ISQ)的变化对患者临床疗效进行评估,比较两组患者术后即刻㊁术后3个月㊁术后6个月的骨厚度㊁骨密度及骨宽度水平;对患者术后咀嚼功能恢复程度㊁牙龈乳头附着高度及整体性牙齿美观程度指标测算值进行比较㊂随访期结束时,收集患者的满意度评价,并比较组间差异㊂结果:在水平及垂直方向,观察组再生骨效果
(94.00%,92.00%)均优于对照组(90.19%,86.27%)㊂对照组患者ISQ均值呈现先下降后上升趋势,
术后1周时患者的ISQ评分最低;观察组ISQ均值呈现逐步上升趋势㊂两组间在术后1周及术后4周㊃8131㊃
ʌ基金项目ɔ2020年度安徽省自然科学基金项目,(编号:2008085MC102)
时的ISQ均值比较存在统计学差异,观察组均值高于对照组(P<0.05),但两组在术后即刻㊁术后8周的ISQ均值比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)㊂两组术后即刻骨厚度㊁骨宽度及骨密度值处于同等水平,具有可比性(P>0.05);术后3个月及术后6个月两组患者的骨厚度㊁骨宽度及骨密度值比较存在统计学差异,观察组高于对照组(P<0.05)㊂与对照组相比较,观察组患者术后咀嚼功能恢复程度㊁牙龈乳头附着高度及整体性牙齿美观程度指标测算值均升高(P<0.05)㊂观察组的满意度为96.00%,高于对照组满意率(84.31%),差异存在统计学意义(P<0.05)㊂结论:在对下颌后牙区骨缺失患者进行即刻种植时采用浓缩生长因子(CGF)联合Biooss骨替代材料可以提高患者满意度和骨再生效果,维持患者术后种植体稳
定,有较好的临床应用效果㊂
ʌ关键词ɔ㊀浓缩生长因子;㊀Biooss;㊀即刻种植;㊀骨缺失;㊀骨再生
ʌ文献标识码ɔ㊀A㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀ʌdoiɔ10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2023.08.017
Value of Concentrated Growth Factors Combined with Biooss Bone
Substitute Materials for the Treatment of Bone Loss in Mandibular
Posterior Region with Immediate Implantation
ZHANG Hongbo,SUN Chuanfeng,ZHANG Yang
(Lu'an People's Hospital,Anhui Lu'an237005,China)
ʌAbstractɔObjective:To study the application value of concentrated growth factor(CGF)and Biooss bone substitute materials in mandibular implants.Methods:A total of101patients with immediate implant bone loss in mandibular posterior area in our hospital from June2019to June2022were retrospectively select-ed,and the patients were grouped according to differences in treatment regimen:51in observatio
n group and 50in control group,The control group was treated with the Biooss bone substitute material,the observation group was given concentrated growth factors on the basis of the control group.The patients were followed up by telephone and outpatient clinic6months after the treatment to compare the horizontal and vertical bone graft-ing,bone thickness and bone regeneration effects between the two groups;the clinical efficacy of the patients was evaluated according to the changes in the postoperative stability coefficients(ISQ),and the levels of bone thickness,bone density,and bone width were compared between the two groups at the immediate postoperative stage,at3months after the surgery and at6months after the surgery;and the patients were compared with re-spect to the degree of recovery of the postoperative masticatory function,the height of gingival papilla attach-ment and overall dental esthetic degree index measurements.The measured values of the patients'postopera-tive masticatory function recovery,gingival papilla attachment height,and overall dental esthetics were com-pared.At the end of the follow-up period,patients'satisfaction with the treatment was collected and the differences between groups were compared.Results:The effect of bone regeneration in the horizontal and ver-tical directions(94.00%,92.00%)was better than that of the control group(90.19%,86.27%).The ISQ mean of patients in control group decreased first and then increased,with the lowest ISQ score of the patients, and the ISQ mean of observation group showed an increasing trend.The ISQ mean was different between both groups at1week and4weeks after the o
peration,and the mean of observation group was higher than that of control group(P<0.05),but the difference between the immediate postoperative and8weeks was not signifi-cant(P>0.05).The immediate bone thickness,bone width and bone density values in the two groups were comparable(P>0.05);compared3and6months after surgery,and observation group was higher than ser-ums(P<0.05).Compared with serums,the recovery degree of masticatory function,the height of the whole gingival nipple increased,with a statistically significant difference(P<0.05).The treatment satisfaction of observers was(96.00%)was higher than that of serums(84.31%),(P<0.05).Conclusion:Concentrate growth factor(CGF)and Biooss bone replacement material can improve patient satisfaction and bone regenera-tion effect,maintain the stability of postoperative implant,and have good clinical application effect.
㊃9131㊃
ʌKey wordsɔ㊀Concentrated growth factor;㊀Biooss;㊀Immediate implant;㊀Bone loss;㊀Bone regen-eration
㊀㊀下颌后牙区骨缺失是由于外伤㊁牙周炎等原因引起的缺牙区牙槽骨萎缩现象,该病症不仅会引起缺牙区域功能受损,还会影响患者发音及心理健康[1,2]㊂作为一种新型的口腔种植技术,即刻种植在临床
的应用越来越多㊂与传统义齿相比,其具有舒适性好㊁不会对邻牙造成损伤及咀嚼效率高等优点[3]㊂针对下颌后牙区骨缺失,获取种植骨量是即刻种植的重点,也是难点[4]㊂自体骨具有较好的生物相容性,愈合速度较快,是公认的骨替代材料,但是该种材料获取量有限㊂Biooss骨替代材料具有较好的引导骨再生的能力,能够促进口腔种植患者骨再生[5,6]㊂但有研究称该材料不能被完全吸收,再加上下颌后牙区术野较差,若出血较多,Biooss的流动分散会导致骨粉丢失,增加手术难度,影响骨生成效果[7]㊂浓缩生长因子是一种血液提取物,具有很好的促进骨组织修复㊁软组织愈合的作用[8]㊂但是有关Biooss骨粉与浓缩生长因子在下颌后牙区骨缺失即刻种植中的应用效果的研究较少,本研究基于此进行探究㊂1㊀资料与方法
1.1㊀一般资料:回顾性选取2019年6月至2022年6月于我院进行下颌后牙区即刻种植骨缺失患者101例,根据方案的不同对患者分组:对照组(n=51)和观察组(n=50),对照组采用Biooss骨替代材料,观察组加用浓缩生长因子㊂两组患者临床基线资料处于同等水平,可进行一般性比较(P>0.05),见表1㊂纳入标准:①患者为单颗或多颗下颌后牙区骨缺失,能耐受即刻种植手术;②患者无其他口腔疾病,能保持较好的口腔卫生;③患者生活能够自理,依从性较高,能配合完成检查且术后能进行口腔清洁;④患者凝血功能正常无其他血液系统疾病;排除标准:①患者存在肝肾功能表现异常,无严重肝肾疾病;②患者有麻醉禁忌症或即刻种植手术禁忌症:如患者软硬组织存在炎症及瘘管㊁存在骨缺损或种植体放置空间不足;③患者存在严重烟酒成瘾性;④中途退出研究患者;⑤在入组前一个月内接受大量激素及抗生素药物患者㊂
表1㊀两组患者基线资料比较[n(%), xʃs]
项目对照组(n=51)观察组(n=50)t/χ2P 年龄(岁)38.57ʃ10.5739.56ʃ11.230.4560.649性别男26(50.98)27(54.00)0.0920.761女25(49.02)23(46.00)
缺牙原因龋病22(43.14)19(38.00)0.9510.813牙周病12(23.53)13(26.00)
外伤2(3.92)4(8.00)
其他15(29.41)14(28.00)
1.2㊀方法:拟种植患者术前含漱0.2%复方氯己定3. 0min,常规消毒铺巾,使用利多卡因进行局麻㊂麻醉起效后将残牙及肉芽组织清除,然后利用生理盐水冲洗㊂借助骨膜分离器剥离骨膜瓣,暴露牙槽骨,在此确认无肉芽组织残留后,植入合适型号种植体,必要时使用扭力扳手手动加力,确保植入扭矩>35N㊃cm㊂确定种植体位置正确后,在其上覆盖螺丝㊂将Biooss骨粉植入种植体周围骨缺损区,缝合㊂缝合后检查术区无骨粉和骨膜暴露㊂术后口服抗生素6d,1周后拆线㊂术后6个月制作固定义齿㊂术后复查锥形束CT㊂在对照组的基础上,观察组使用浓缩生长因子㊂浓缩因子制备:种植术前10min采集患者静脉血于无抗凝剂的无菌玻璃管中,经1500r/min离心14min后,弃去血小板缺乏的血浆及红细胞部分,得到凝胶,并用无菌干纱布吸取该凝胶上存在的血清㊂将制备的浓缩生长因子层剪碎混合Biooss骨粉混合均匀填入相应区域㊂
1.3㊀观察指标:骨组织指标:拍摄锥形束CT,测定术后即刻㊁术后3个月及术后6个月后骨厚度㊁骨宽度及
㊃0231㊃
骨密度值㊂再测定水平及垂直上植骨厚度㊁成骨厚度㊁骨再生效果,骨再生效果=成骨厚度/植骨厚度ˑ
100%,测量3次取平均值㊂术后即刻㊁术后1周㊁术后4周㊁术后8周利用OsstellISQ传感器RegularNeckSm-artPeg测定术后稳定系数(ISQ)㊂具体方式是:使用4 ~6Ncm的力与种植体相连接,于颊㊁舌㊁牙合方三处分别ISQ值,以最终的平均值作为检测结果㊂ISQ值越大种植体越稳定㊂对患者术后咀嚼功能恢复程度㊁牙龈乳头附着高度及整体性牙齿美观程度指标测算值进行比较㊂满意度评价标准:自行设计满意度调查表,全方面进行评价,包括咀嚼㊁疼痛㊁舒适感㊁种植体固位稳定㊁期望值㊂共计100分,得分高于90分为满意,得分在60~90分认为患者基本满意,得分低于60分认为不满意㊂满意率计算为满意与基本满意例数之和与总例数的比值㊂
1.4㊀统计学方法:以SPSS23.0软件处理研究数据,对于患者的计数资料均以n(%)描述,进行卡方检验;组间采用独立样本t检验,采用重复测量方差分析法比较重复测量的数据,以( xʃs)描述,组内比较进行配对样本t检验;本研究水准为α=0.05㊂
2㊀结㊀果
潘阳资料2.1㊀两组水平及垂直植骨㊁成骨厚度及骨再生效果比较:由表2可知,在水平及垂直方向,观察组再生骨效果(94.00%,92.00%)均优于对照组(90.19%,86. 27%),两组间比较无差异(P>0.05)㊂
表2㊀两组水平及垂直植骨成骨厚度及骨再生效果比较[n(%), xʃs]
组别n
水平
植骨厚度(mm)㊀成骨厚度(mm)㊀骨再生效果
垂直
植骨厚度(mm)㊀成骨厚度(mm)㊀骨再生效果
对照组51  1.42ʃ0.32  1.28ʃ0.2346(90.19)  3.67ʃ0.54  2.45ʃ0.2344(86.27)观察组50  1.54ʃ0.31  1.46ʃ0.4547(94.00)  3.78ʃ0.45  2.89ʃ0.1846(92.00) t/χ2  1.559  2.393
P0.2120.122
2.2㊀两组不同时间段ISQ均值比较:术后即刻两组ISQ均值比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);对照组患
者ISQ均值呈现先下降后上升趋势,术后1周时患者的ISQ评分最低;观察组ISQ均值呈现逐步上升趋势㊂两组间在术后1周及术后4周时的ISQ均值比较存在统计学差异,观察组均值高于对照组(P<0.05),但两组在术后8周时的ISQ均值比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)㊂见表3㊂
表3㊀两组不同时间段ISQ均值比较( xʃs)
组别n术后即刻术后1周术后4周术后8周对照组5177.43ʃ3.1274.05ʃ3.31#77.54ʃ2.3578.74ʃ2.32观察组5077.31ʃ3.7877.45ʃ2.87∗78.55ʃ2.32∗#79.52ʃ2.33# F F组间=16.640㊁F时间=4.924㊁F交互=7.763
P P组间<0.001㊁P时间=0.008㊁P交互<0.001
㊀㊀注:与对照组比较∗P<0.05,与本组术后即刻比较#P<0.05 2.3㊀两组种植后不同时间点骨厚度㊁骨宽度及骨密度值比较:两组术后即刻骨厚度㊁骨宽度及骨密度值处于同等水平,具有可比性(P>0.05);术后3个月及术后6个月两组患者的骨厚度㊁骨宽度及骨密度值比较存在统计学差异,观察组高于对照组(P<0.05)㊂见表4㊂
㊃1231㊃
表4㊀两组种植后不同时间点骨厚度骨宽度及骨密度值比较( xʃs)
组别n
骨厚度(mm)
术后即刻㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀术后3个月㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀术后6个月
对照组51  2.98ʃ0.55  2.71ʃ0.37#  2.64ʃ0.32#
观察组50  3.05ʃ0.52  2.92ʃ0.45∗  2.85ʃ0.38∗# F F组间=9.281㊁F时间=7.703㊁F交互=5.881
P P组间<0.001㊁P时间<0.001㊁P交互=0.003
组别n
骨厚度(mm)
术后即刻㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀术后3个月㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀术后6个月
对照组51  1.45ʃ0.16  1.56ʃ0.21#  1.52ʃ0.15#
观察组50  1.43ʃ0.13  1.83ʃ0.22∗#  1.87ʃ0.11∗# F F组间=10.203㊁F时间=13.281㊁F交互=8.469
P P组间<0.001㊁P时间<0.001㊁P交互<0.001
组别n
骨厚度(mm)
术后即刻㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀术后3个月㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀㊀术后6个月
对照组517.85ʃ0.217.23ʃ0.31#7.31ʃ0.33#观察组507.92ʃ0.238.21ʃ0.22∗#8.14ʃ0.36∗#
F F组间=23.162㊁F时间=7.380㊁F交互=12.395
P P组间<0.001㊁P时间<0.001㊁P交互<0.001
㊀㊀注:与对照组比较∗P<0.05,与本组术后即刻比较#P<0.05
2.4㊀两组术后咀嚼功能恢复程度㊁牙龈乳头附着高度及整体性牙齿美观程度指标测算值比较:与对照组相比较,观察组患者术后咀嚼功能恢复程度㊁牙龈乳头附着高度及整体性牙齿美观程度指标测算值均升高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),见表5㊂
表5㊀两组术后咀嚼功能恢复程度牙龈乳头附着高度及整体性牙齿美观程度指标测算值比较( xʃs)组别n咀嚼功能恢复程度牙龈乳头附着高度整体性牙齿美观程度对照组51  6.42ʃ0.427.12ʃ0.878.25ʃ1.21观察组508.88ʃ0.558.78ʃ1.138.87ʃ1.12
t-25.227-8.261-2.673
P<0.001<0.0010.009
2.5㊀两组患者满意度比较:观察组的满意度为
96.00%,高于对照组满意率(84.31%),存在统计学差异(P<0.05),见表6㊂
㊃2231㊃