World journal of clinical cases · 2024
Clinical efficacy, bone density, and follow-up in implant and orthodontic treatment for inclined adjacent teeth.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang Yi, Zhou Shun-Cheng, Ma Yi-Hui, Wang Xiang, Dong Qing-Shan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Tooth defects can cause elongation of occlusal teeth, leading to insufficient repair space. The combination of dental implant restoration and orthodontic treatment of oblique adjacent teeth has a significant therapeutic effect.
AIM: To explore clinical efficacy, bone density, and follow-up of implant and orthodontic treatment for patients with inclined adjacent teeth.
METHODS: In total, 98 patients with oblique adjacent teeth were randomly assigned to implant restoration combined with orthodontic treatment (group A, n = 49) or to receive implant restoration alone (group B, n = 49). Changes in alveolar ridge bone density and apical bone density were observed before and after treatment in the two groups. Changes in chewing function and language function were compared between the two groups of patients. Follow-up lasted for 12 mo after repair to observe any adverse reactions in the oral cavity.
RESULTS: The clinical effective rates of group A and group B were 97.96% and 85.71%, respectively, with group A having a higher clinical effective rate than group B. After treatment, the bone density of the alveolar ridge and apical bone in both groups decreased compared to before treatment, while the chewing and language functions improved. The changes in various indicators in group A were more significant. After treatment, the satisfaction rate of group A (97.96%) was higher than that of group B (79.59%). The incidence of adverse reactions in group A (2.04%) was lower than that in group B (24.49%).
CONCLUSION: The amalgamation of implant restoration and orthodontic treatment for adjacent tilted teeth demonstrates notable clinical efficacy, diminishes alveolar bone resorption, and fosters patient functional rehabilitation while exhibiting negligible adverse reactions.
AIM: To explore clinical efficacy, bone density, and follow-up of implant and orthodontic treatment for patients with inclined adjacent teeth.
METHODS: In total, 98 patients with oblique adjacent teeth were randomly assigned to implant restoration combined with orthodontic treatment (group A, n = 49) or to receive implant restoration alone (group B, n = 49). Changes in alveolar ridge bone density and apical bone density were observed before and after treatment in the two groups. Changes in chewing function and language function were compared between the two groups of patients. Follow-up lasted for 12 mo after repair to observe any adverse reactions in the oral cavity.
RESULTS: The clinical effective rates of group A and group B were 97.96% and 85.71%, respectively, with group A having a higher clinical effective rate than group B. After treatment, the bone density of the alveolar ridge and apical bone in both groups decreased compared to before treatment, while the chewing and language functions improved. The changes in various indicators in group A were more significant. After treatment, the satisfaction rate of group A (97.96%) was higher than that of group B (79.59%). The incidence of adverse reactions in group A (2.04%) was lower than that in group B (24.49%).
CONCLUSION: The amalgamation of implant restoration and orthodontic treatment for adjacent tilted teeth demonstrates notable clinical efficacy, diminishes alveolar bone resorption, and fosters patient functional rehabilitation while exhibiting negligible adverse reactions.