Purpose: This study evaluated the clinical applications of implant placement and guided bone regeneration using a mineralized bone allograft and a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium Methods: From January 2007 to June 2009, among the patients who received an implant at Chosun University Dental Hospital,patients were selected if they were treated with guided bone regeneration (GBR) with simultaneous implant placement or GBR prior to implant placement. The selected patients were sorted according to the materials and membranes used in GBR,and the implant survival rate was recorded by clinical examination and reviewing the medical records and the radiographs.
Each study list was analyzed by SPSS (version 12.0, SPSS Inc., USA) software and the survival rate was verified by Chi-square tests. P values less than 0.05% were deemed significant.
Results: 278 implants were placed on a total of 101 patients and 8 implants resulted in failure. Three implants failed among 15 implants with only a mineralized bone allograft. No failure was shown among the 74 implants placed with mineralized bone allograft and a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium. One group of 4 implant placements showed failure among the 102 implants placed with a mineralized bone allograft and another bone graft material. The group that had a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium with a mineralized bone allograft or other bone materials showed no implant failure. Three failures were shown among the 21 implants placed with only bone graft and not using a membrane. The group with membranes other than a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium showed 5 failures among 170 implants.
Conclusion: The implant survival rate of the group with GBR using a mineralized bone allograft was 96.3%, which meant there was little difference compared to the groups of another bone graft materials (98.9%). The implant survival rate of the group without a membrane-was 85.7% and it showed a significant difference compared to the group using a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium (100%) and the group using another membrane (97.1%).
영어초록
Purpose: This study evaluated the clinical applications of implant placement and guided bone regeneration using a mineralized bone allograft and a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium Methods: From January 2007 to June 2009, among the patients who received an implant at Chosun University Dental Hospital,patients were selected if they were treated with guided bone regeneration (GBR) with simultaneous implant placement or GBR prior to implant placement. The selected patients were sorted according to the materials and membranes used in GBR,and the implant survival rate was recorded by clinical examination and reviewing the medical records and the radiographs.
Each study list was analyzed by SPSS (version 12.0, SPSS Inc., USA) software and the survival rate was verified by Chi-square tests. P values less than 0.05% were deemed significant.
Results: 278 implants were placed on a total of 101 patients and 8 implants resulted in failure. Three implants failed among 15 implants with only a mineralized bone allograft. No failure was shown among the 74 implants placed with mineralized bone allograft and a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium. One group of 4 implant placements showed failure among the 102 implants placed with a mineralized bone allograft and another bone graft material. The group that had a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium with a mineralized bone allograft or other bone materials showed no implant failure. Three failures were shown among the 21 implants placed with only bone graft and not using a membrane. The group with membranes other than a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium showed 5 failures among 170 implants.
Conclusion: The implant survival rate of the group with GBR using a mineralized bone allograft was 96.3%, which meant there was little difference compared to the groups of another bone graft materials (98.9%). The implant survival rate of the group without a membrane-was 85.7% and it showed a significant difference compared to the group using a barrier membrane derived from ox pericardium (100%) and the group using another membrane (97.1%).
자료의 정보 및 내용의 진실성에 대하여 해피캠퍼스는 보증하지 않으며, 해당 정보 및 게시물 저작권과 기타 법적 책임은 자료 등록자에게 있습니다. 자료 및 게시물 내용의 불법적 이용, 무단 전재∙배포는 금지되어 있습니다. 저작권침해, 명예훼손 등 분쟁 요소 발견 시 고객센터의 저작권침해 신고센터를 이용해 주시기 바랍니다.
해피캠퍼스는 구매자와 판매자 모두가 만족하는 서비스가 되도록 노력하고 있으며, 아래의 4가지 자료환불 조건을 꼭 확인해주시기 바랍니다.
파일오류
중복자료
저작권 없음
설명과 실제 내용 불일치
파일의 다운로드가 제대로 되지 않거나 파일형식에 맞는 프로그램으로 정상 작동하지 않는 경우
다른 자료와 70% 이상 내용이 일치하는 경우 (중복임을 확인할 수 있는 근거 필요함)
인터넷의 다른 사이트, 연구기관, 학교, 서적 등의 자료를 도용한 경우
자료의 설명과 실제 자료의 내용이 일치하지 않는 경우
“Maxillofacial Plastic Reconstructive Surgery”의 다른 논문도 확인해 보세요!