| Objective: Comparison of the anterior maxilla immediate implant group and delayedplanting group, the difference in the amount of the implant neck bone resorption indifferent periods, provide a theoretical basis for better treatment options physicians chooseto provide reference data for future clinical studies in implantology.Methods: Patient follow-up visits in2010and2013in April2012in Yinchuan CityDental Hospital for dental implants before the38,22were men and16women, aged18to69years, a total of48teeth. They were divided into two groups, immediate implant groupof16people,21teeth, mean age40years; delayed planting group of22people,27teeth,with an average age of41years.6month after implant permanent fix, followed up1to18months, respectively, after surgery the same day, a month, six months, one month after thepermanent repair,6months,12months taken root tip sheet, oral surface faults and CBCT,measuring various indicators to calculate the amount of alveolar bone and neck andcontrast changes in alveolar two groups of patients over time.Results:38patients, including16cases of immediate implant, implant21implants;22cases of immediate implant, implant27implants; MG implant system used in allpermanent repair were six months later. After referral to observe, no soft tissue swelling,inflammation, pain and discomfort, wound healing bone area well. After the permanentrestoration followed up1to12months, X-ray and CBCT Show implant and thesurrounding bone tissue tightly around the gingival tissue health, no case of inflammationaround the implant, prosthesis beautiful, functional status and exercise good shape softtissues, patients repair satisfactory success rate of100%.1. The amount of bone resorption were two different time points:Immediate implant, bone loss after one month was0.30±0.03mm significantly greaterthan6months after surgery for bone resorption volume0.16±0.03mm, the difference wasstatistically significant (p<0.01); After the repair of bone resorption amount a month was0.32±0.07mm, was0.13±0.05mm6months, was0.12±0.04mm12months, the amount ofbone resorption after a month of repair after repair was significantly greater than6and12months when the amount of bone resorption, the difference was statistically significant(p<0.01), after the repair of bone resorption6and12months when the amount of thedifference was not statistically significant (p>0.5). Extension of cultivation, the amount of bone resorption after one month was0.46±0.05mm amount of bone resorption was significantly greater than after6months of0.21±0.06mm, the difference was statistically significant (p<0.01);1rear repair monthwhen the amount of bone resorption was0.35±0.06mm,6months0.13±0.04mm,12months0.13±0.04mm, the amount of bone resorption during a month after the repair wassignificantly greater than6and12months after repair amount of bone resorption, thedifference was statistically significant (p<0.01), after the repair of bone resorption6and12months when the amount of the difference was not statistically significant (p>0.5).2. The quantity of bone resorption at different time points were compared:After1month and6months after planting delayed resorption group was significantlygreater than the immediate implant group, the difference was statistically significant (p<0.01). After the repair of bone resorption1,6,12months the amount of the difference wasnot statistically significant (p>0.5).Conclusion:1. Immediately after planting operative bone loss in the first month and6-month extensionof time is less than the implant group, no difference in the amount of bone resorptionrest of the time period.2. Two implants of non-load and load period (after the completion of the permanentrestoration) of bone resorption, are mainly occurred in the first month and a permanentrepair in the first month after the completion of planting after surgery, with the passageof time after bone resorption and speed gradually slowed down. |
