Email Alert | RSS

北京大学学报（医学版） ›› 2022, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (1): 187-192. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2022.01.030

• 技术方法 • 上一篇    下一篇

预成刚性连接杆用于无牙颌种植即刻印模制取的应用评价

王鹃1,尉华杰1,孙井德2,邱立新1,△()   

  1. 1.北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院第四门诊部,国家口腔医学中心,国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心,口腔数字化医疗技术和材料国家工程实验室,北京 100025
    2.北京迪艺医学技术有限公司·口腔数字化美学工作室,北京 100176
  • 收稿日期:2021-09-23 出版日期:2022-02-18 发布日期:2022-02-21
  • 通讯作者: 邱立新 E-mail:kqqiulixin@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    北京大学口腔医院临床新技术新疗法项目(PKUSSNCT-19B05)

Application evaluation of prefabricated rigid connecting bar in implants immediate impression preparation of edentulous jaw

WANG Juan1,YU Hua-jie1,SUN Jing-de2,QIU Li-xin1,△()   

  1. 1. Fourth Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China
    2. Beijing D&E Medical Limited Company, Dental Digital & Esthetics Laboratory, Beijing 100176, China
  • Received:2021-09-23 Online:2022-02-18 Published:2022-02-21
  • Contact: Li-xin QIU E-mail:kqqiulixin@163.com
  • Supported by:
    Program for New Clinical Techniques and Therapies of Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology(PKUSSNCT-19B05)

RICH HTML

 11   

PDF (PC)

220

摘要：

目的: 比较传统夹板式印模和利用预成刚性连接杆系统进行无牙颌种植固定修复印模制取的操作复杂程度及精度差异。方法: 制备带有6颗种植体替代体的下颌无牙颌标准模型,种植体植入位置平齐骨面,在种植体替代体上连接多牙修复基台。对照组采用传统开窗夹板式印模技术制取印模,在多牙修复基台上连接转移杆,使用聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯材料制作夹板,并制取开窗印模。试验组采用刚性连接杆系统制取开窗印模,在多牙修复基台上连接临时修复套筒,根据种植体间距,选择合适长度的预成刚性连接杆,使用少量聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯材料将套筒和预成刚性连接杆固定,制取开窗印模。实验组和对照组各重复6次印模制取,比较试验组和对照组的印模制取耗时差异。在制取的印模上连接基台替代体,灌制石膏模型,并使用模型扫描仪将石膏模型和标准模型转化为三角网格数据文件。将试验组和对照组模型分别与标准模型进行精度差异测量,比较两种印模方法获得模型的精度差异。结果: 在标准模型上进行印模制取,试验组用时显著低于对照组,两者差异有统计学意义[(984.5±63.3) s vs. (1 478.3±156.2) s, P<0.05]。与标准模型相比,在种植体基台处,试验组制取印模灌制模型均方根误差(root mean aquare,RMS)与对照组模型基本相同,两者差异无统计学意义[(16.9±5.5) μm vs. (20.2±8.0) μm, P>0.05]。结论: 预成刚性连接杆可以简化无牙颌种植即刻固定修复的印模流程,节约椅旁操作时间,获取的印模精度与传统印模技术无显著差异,值得在临床推广使用。

关键词: 牙种植, 颌, 无牙, 牙科印模技术, 牙修复体固位

Abstract:

Objective: To compare the operation complexity and accuracy of traditional splint impression technique and impression technique with prefabricated rigid connecting bar system for full-arch implants-supported fixed protheses in vitro. Methods: Standard mandibular edentulous model with six implant analogs was prepared. The implants were placed at the bone level and multiunit abutments screwed into the implants. Two impression techniques were performed: the traditional splint impression technique was used in the control group, and the rigid connecting bar system was used in the test group. In the control group, impression copings were screwed into the multiunit abutments and connected with autopolymerizing acrylic resin. Open tray impression was fabricated with custom tray and polyether. In the test group, cylinders were screwed into the multiunit abutments. Prefabricated rigid bars with suitable length were selected and connected to the cylinders with small amount of autopolymerizing acrylic resin, and open tray impression was obtained. Impression procedures were repeated 6 times in each group. The working time of the two impression methods were recorded and compared. Analogs were screws into the impressions and gypsum casts were poured. The gypsum casts and the standard model were transferred to stereolithography (STL) files with model scanner. Comparative analysis of the STL files of the gypsum casts and the standard model was carried out and the root mean square (RMS) error value of the gypsum casts of the control and test groups compared with the standard model was recorded. The trueness of the two impression techniques was compared. Results: The work time in the test group was significantly lower than that in the control group and the difference was statistically significant [(984.5±63.3) s vs. (1 478.3±156.2) s, P<0.05]. Compared with the standard model, the RMS error value of the implant abutments in the test group was (16.9±5.5) μm. The RMS value in the control group was (20.2±8.0) μm. The difference between the two groups was not significant (P>0.05). Conclusion: The prefabricated rigid connecting bar can save the chair-side work time in implants immediate loading of edentulous jaw and simplify the impression process. The impression accuracy is not significantly different from the traditional impression technology. The impression technique with prefabricated rigid connecting bar system is worthy of clinical application.

Key words: Dental implantation, Jaw, edentulous, Dental impression technique, Dental prosthesis retention

中图分类号: 

  • R783.6

图1

预成刚性连接杆系统"

图2

带有六个种植体和基台的下颌标准模型"

图3

传统夹板式印模流程"

图4

利用预成刚性连接杆制取印模流程"

图5

标准模型和测试模型的3D偏差分析示例"

表1

两种印模方法的耗时和模型误差值比较(n=6)"

Groups Impression work time/s RMS value/μm
Traditional splint technique 1 478.3±156.2 16.9±5.5
Prefabricated rigid
connecting bar technique		 984.5±63.3 20.2±8.0
t 6.553 1.286
P <0.001 0.210

图6

利用预成刚性连接杆行无牙颌种植后即刻修复流程"

[1] Malo P, de Araujo Nobre M, Lopes A, et al. “All-on-4” imme-diate-function concept for completely edentulous maxillae: A clinical report on the medium (3 years) and long-term (5 years) outcomes[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2012, 14(Suppl 1):e139-e150.
doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00395.x
[2] Malo P, Lopes A, de Araujo Nobre M, et al. Immediate function dental implants inserted with less than 30N·cm of torque in full-arch maxillary rehabilitations using the all-on-4 concept: Retrospective study[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2018, 47(8):1079-1085.
[3] Sahin S, Cehreli MC. The significance of passive framework fit in implant prosthodontics: Current status[J]. Implant Dent, 2001, 10(2):85-92.
pmid: 11450418
[4] 周立伟. 种植多单位修复中螺丝固位与粘接固位联合运用中机械并发症发生情况的回顾性研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2021, 37(1):63-66.
[5] Liu X, Li M, Liu J, et al. Passively fitting implant-supported complete-arch interim restoration[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2019, 121(5):733-736.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.09.018
[6] Revilla-Leon M, Sanchez-Rubio JL, Oteo-Calatayud J, et al. Impression technique for a complete-arch prosjournal with multiple implants using additive manufacturing technologies[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2017, 117(6):714-720.
doi: S0022-3913(16)30511-X pmid: 27889076
[7] Ma J, Rubenstein JE. Complete arch implant impression technique[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2012, 107(6):405-410.
doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60100-0
[8] Mizumoto RM, Yilmaz B, McGlumphy EA, et al. Accuracy of different digital scanning techniques and scan bodies for complete-arch implant-supported prostheses[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2020, 123(1):96-104.
doi: S0022-3913(19)30076-9 pmid: 31040026
[9] Papaspyridakos P, Hirayama H, Chen CJ, et al. Full-arch implant fixed prostheses: A comparative study on the effect of connection type and impression technique on accuracy of fit[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2016, 27(9):1099-1105.
doi: 10.1111/clr.2016.27.issue-9
[10] Vigolo P, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. Evaluation of the accuracy of three techniques used for multiple implant abutment impressions[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2003, 89(2):186-192.
pmid: 12616240
[11] Liu Y, Di P, Zhao Y, et al. Accuracy of multi-implant impressions using 3D-printing custom trays and splinting versus conventional techniques for complete arches[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2019, 34(4):1007-1014.
doi: 10.11607/jomi.7049
[12] Revilla-Leon M, Att W, Ozcan M, et al. Comparison of conventional, photogrammetry, and intraoral scanning accuracy of complete-arch implant impression procedures evaluated with a coordinate measuring machine[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2021, 125(3):470-478.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.03.005 pmid: 32386912
[13] 陈江, 张思慧. 无牙颌种植修复的数字化临床诊疗流程[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2020, 36(3):193-198.
[14] Ruttermann S, Alberts I, Raab WH, et al. Physical properties of self-, dual-, and light-cured direct core materials[J]. Clinical Oral Investigations, 2011, 15(4):597-603.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0405-y
[15] Albiero AM, Benato R, Momic S, et al. Guided-welded approach planning using a computer-aided designed prosthetic shell for immediately loaded complete-arch rehabilitations supported by conometric abutments[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2019, 122(6):510-515.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.12.002
[16] Stimmelmayr M, Beuer F, Edelhoff D, et al. Implant impression techniques for the edentulous jaw: A summary of three studies[J]. J Prosthodont, 2016, 25(2):146-150.
doi: 10.1111/jopr.12305 pmid: 26032581
[17] Gherlone EF, Sannino G, Rapanelli A, et al. Prefabricated bar system for immediate loading in edentulous patients: A 5-year follow-up prospective longitudinal study[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2018, 2018:7352125.
doi: 10.1155/2018/7352125 pmid: 29682552
[18] Hashemzadeh S, Yilmaz B, Zugaro F, et al. An alternative conversion technique for fabricating an interim fixed implant-supported complete arch prosjournal[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2016, 116(5):647-651.
doi: S0022-3913(16)30147-0 pmid: 27460316
[1] 陈震,谷宝鑫,汤玉芳,闫子玉,倪方端,崔念晖. 应用Delphi法构建下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度评分量表[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 100-104.
[2] 俞光岩,柳登高,李巍,洪霞,张严妍,朱文瑄,张可夫,李潇,栗占国,刘燕鹰,陈艳,高岩,苏家增. 3类新型慢性唾液腺炎的诊断和治疗[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 13-17.
[3] 陈超伦,苏家增,俞光岩. 酸刺激对腮腺和下颌下腺唾液流率及成分的影响[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 89-94.
[4] 周伟,安金刚,荣起国,张益. 下颌骨颏部骨折联合双侧髁突囊内骨折致伤机制的三维有限元分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 983-989.
[5] 梁峰,吴敏节,邹立东. 后牙区单牙种植修复5年后的临床修复疗效观察[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 970-976.
[6] 朱忆颖,闵赛南,俞光岩. 局部注射环孢素A对非肥胖糖尿病小鼠下颌下腺分泌功能及炎症的影响[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(4): 750-757.
[7] 姜又升,冯琳,高学军. 垫底材料弹性模量对髓腔固位冠修复后上颌前磨牙应力分布的影响[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(4): 764-769.
[8] 刘晓强,杨洋,周建锋,刘建彰,谭建国. 640例单牙种植术对血压和心率影响的队列研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 390-395.
[9] 孟圆,张丽琪,赵雅宁,柳登高,张祖燕,高岩. 67例上颌根尖周囊肿的三维影像特点分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 396-401.
[10] 俞光岩. 多发性唾液腺肿大的鉴别诊断及处理[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 1-4.
[11] 周境,刘怡. 不同垂直骨面型骨性Ⅱ类青少年女性颞下颌关节锥形束CT测量分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 109-119.
[12] 王怡平,蔡志刚,彭歆,张杰,孙志鹏,李巍,张雷,俞光岩. 下颌下腺质量和体积的实体体外检测[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 126-132.
[13] 周培茹, 蒋析, 华红. 口腔黏膜病患者口腔种植的时机及注意事项[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 5-8.
[14] 韩玮华,罗海燕,郭传瑸,宁琦,孟娟红. 软骨寡聚基质蛋白在颞下颌关节滑膜软骨瘤病中的表达[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 34-39.
[15] 李蓬,朴牧子,胡洪成,王勇,赵一姣,申晓婧. 经嵴顶上颌窦底提升术后不植骨同期种植的影像研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 95-101.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 周彦秋, 林久祥. RT-PCR法研究sonic hedgehog基因及其受体patched在小鼠牙胚钟状晚期的表达[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2002, 34(2): 137 -139 .
[2] 应嘉, 赵睿颖, 尚彤. 生物信息学在人类基因组计划中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2002, 34(4): 389 -392 .
[3] 李贵忠, 袁亦铭, 张军, 杨新宇, 夏同礼, 郭应禄, 那彦群. 利用前列腺穿刺活检结果预测前列腺癌包膜外侵犯和精囊浸润[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2003, 35(6): 581 -585 .
[4] 郭艳利, 游珂, 耿力, 张小为, 沈晓野, 姚燕君, 范晓红. 不典型鳞状细胞和低度鳞状上皮内病变中高危型人乳头瘤状病毒检测的作用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2006, 38(5): 480 -482 .
[5] 杨欢*, 周方, 田耘, 姬洪全, 张志山. 股骨粗隆部骨折内固定失败原因分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2011, 43(5): 699 -702 .
[6] 李子一1, 王金子, 张雅蓉, 余恺, 司徒文佑, 尤莉莉, 陈程, 李文军, 王培玉, 张玉梅. 家长自报4~36月龄婴幼儿挑食行为的准确性评价[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2014, 46(3): 383 -388 .
[7] 黄婧, 郭斌, 郭新彪. 交通噪声对人群健康影响的研究进展[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2015, 47(3): 555 -558 .
[8] 蒋洁，崔立刚， 王金锐， 江凌， 李志强， 赵博. 胸大肌的超声解剖及其撕裂的声像图特点[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2016, 48(1): 166 -169 .
[9] 高志强，安贵生，李绍良. 应用扩展的桡侧腕屈肌入路治疗复杂的桡骨远端关节内骨折[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(2): 349 -353 .
[10] 范爱琴，冯金秋，刘伟，张敏佳，刘坦，周雅琳，许雅君. 槲皮素拮抗大气细颗粒物PM2.5对大鼠胚胎毒性的体外研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(3): 388 -393 .
ISSN 1671-167X
CN 11-4691/R
主管单位：中华人民共和国教育部
主办单位：北京大学
地址： 北京市海淀区学院路38号 北京大学医学部 《北京大学学报（医学版）》
邮编：100191
电话：010-82801551
Email： xbbjb2@bjmu.edu.cn

《北京大学学报（医学版）》
微信公众号
版权所有 © 2018 《北京大学学报（医学版）》编辑部