拔牙后保留牙脊的两种不同技术的比较分析:临床和放射学研究

IF 0.8 Q3 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_190_24
Naseemoon Shaik, Sai D. R. Rajoli, P. S. Sarika, Venkatesh Bejagam, Shifa F. Shajahan, Ghanta Snehika
{"title":"拔牙后保留牙脊的两种不同技术的比较分析:临床和放射学研究","authors":"Naseemoon Shaik, Sai D. R. Rajoli, P. S. Sarika, Venkatesh Bejagam, Shifa F. Shajahan, Ghanta Snehika","doi":"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_190_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n \n \n \n Ridge preservation following tooth extraction is essential for maintaining the alveolar bone structure and facilitating successful dental implant placement. Various techniques have been proposed for this purpose, but there remains a need for comparative analysis to determine their efficacy.\n \n \n \n This clinical and radiographic study compared two different techniques for ridge preservation: Technique A and Technique B. Fifty patients requiring tooth extraction were randomly assigned to either Technique A or Technique B group. Clinical parameters including pain, swelling, and soft tissue healing were evaluated postoperatively. Radiographic assessments were conducted to measure the dimensional changes in the alveolar ridge at baseline and after 3 months using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).\n \n \n \n In the Technique A group, postoperative pain scores averaged 2.3 (±0.5) on a visual analog scale (VAS), while in the Technique B group, the average pain score was 2.5 (±0.6). The swelling was minimal in both groups with no significant difference. Soft tissue healing was satisfactory in both groups. Radiographically, the mean vertical bone loss was 1.2 mm (±0.3) in the Technique A group and 0.9 mm (±0.4) in the Technique B group, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).\n \n \n \n Both Technique A and Technique B demonstrated favorable outcomes in terms of postoperative discomfort and soft tissue healing. However, Technique B showed superior preservation of vertical ridge dimensions compared to Technique A. Therefore, Technique B may be considered more effective for ridge preservation following tooth extraction.\n","PeriodicalId":16824,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences","volume":"16 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Two Different Techniques for Ridge Preservation Following Tooth Extraction: A Clinical and Radiographic Study\",\"authors\":\"Naseemoon Shaik, Sai D. R. Rajoli, P. S. Sarika, Venkatesh Bejagam, Shifa F. Shajahan, Ghanta Snehika\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_190_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT\\n \\n \\n \\n Ridge preservation following tooth extraction is essential for maintaining the alveolar bone structure and facilitating successful dental implant placement. Various techniques have been proposed for this purpose, but there remains a need for comparative analysis to determine their efficacy.\\n \\n \\n \\n This clinical and radiographic study compared two different techniques for ridge preservation: Technique A and Technique B. Fifty patients requiring tooth extraction were randomly assigned to either Technique A or Technique B group. Clinical parameters including pain, swelling, and soft tissue healing were evaluated postoperatively. Radiographic assessments were conducted to measure the dimensional changes in the alveolar ridge at baseline and after 3 months using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).\\n \\n \\n \\n In the Technique A group, postoperative pain scores averaged 2.3 (±0.5) on a visual analog scale (VAS), while in the Technique B group, the average pain score was 2.5 (±0.6). The swelling was minimal in both groups with no significant difference. Soft tissue healing was satisfactory in both groups. Radiographically, the mean vertical bone loss was 1.2 mm (±0.3) in the Technique A group and 0.9 mm (±0.4) in the Technique B group, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).\\n \\n \\n \\n Both Technique A and Technique B demonstrated favorable outcomes in terms of postoperative discomfort and soft tissue healing. However, Technique B showed superior preservation of vertical ridge dimensions compared to Technique A. Therefore, Technique B may be considered more effective for ridge preservation following tooth extraction.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":16824,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences\",\"volume\":\"16 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_190_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_190_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 拔牙后保留牙脊对于维持牙槽骨结构和促进种植牙的成功植入至关重要。为此,人们提出了多种技术,但仍需要进行比较分析以确定其有效性。 这项临床和放射学研究比较了两种不同的牙脊保存技术,即技术 A 和技术 B:50 名需要拔牙的患者被随机分配到技术 A 组或技术 B 组。术后对疼痛、肿胀和软组织愈合等临床参数进行评估。使用锥束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)对基线和 3 个月后的牙槽嵴尺寸变化进行放射学评估。 在技术 A 组中,术后疼痛评分在视觉模拟量表(VAS)上平均为 2.3(±0.5)分,而在技术 B 组中,平均疼痛评分为 2.5(±0.6)分。两组患者的肿胀都很轻微,没有明显差异。两组的软组织愈合情况均令人满意。从影像学上看,技术 A 组的平均垂直骨量损失为 1.2 毫米(±0.3),技术 B 组为 0.9 毫米(±0.4),差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。 在术后不适和软组织愈合方面,技术 A 和技术 B 都取得了良好的效果。不过,与技术 A 相比,技术 B 显示出更佳的垂直牙脊尺寸保存效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparative Analysis of Two Different Techniques for Ridge Preservation Following Tooth Extraction: A Clinical and Radiographic Study
ABSTRACT Ridge preservation following tooth extraction is essential for maintaining the alveolar bone structure and facilitating successful dental implant placement. Various techniques have been proposed for this purpose, but there remains a need for comparative analysis to determine their efficacy. This clinical and radiographic study compared two different techniques for ridge preservation: Technique A and Technique B. Fifty patients requiring tooth extraction were randomly assigned to either Technique A or Technique B group. Clinical parameters including pain, swelling, and soft tissue healing were evaluated postoperatively. Radiographic assessments were conducted to measure the dimensional changes in the alveolar ridge at baseline and after 3 months using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). In the Technique A group, postoperative pain scores averaged 2.3 (±0.5) on a visual analog scale (VAS), while in the Technique B group, the average pain score was 2.5 (±0.6). The swelling was minimal in both groups with no significant difference. Soft tissue healing was satisfactory in both groups. Radiographically, the mean vertical bone loss was 1.2 mm (±0.3) in the Technique A group and 0.9 mm (±0.4) in the Technique B group, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). Both Technique A and Technique B demonstrated favorable outcomes in terms of postoperative discomfort and soft tissue healing. However, Technique B showed superior preservation of vertical ridge dimensions compared to Technique A. Therefore, Technique B may be considered more effective for ridge preservation following tooth extraction.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
275
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences is a Quarterly multidisciplinary open access biomedical journal. Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences is an international medium of interaction between scientist, academicians and industrial personnel’s.JPBS is now offial publication of OPUBS.
期刊最新文献
The Role of Tele-Orthodontics in Enhancing Patient Compliance and Treatment Monitoring Exploring the Therapeutic Potential of Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation in Dry Eye Syndrome: An In vitro Investigation Enhancing Precision in Endodontic Procedures: An In vitro Investigation of Magnification and Enhanced Visualization Comparative Evaluation of Surgical Techniques for Pterygium Management: An In Vitro Study Schoolchildren’s Musculoskeletal Pain and Backpack Weight Impact on Posture: A Short-Term Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1