两种排龈方法排龈效果的数字化分析

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的数字化分析比较半导体激光排龈及单线排龈法的临床排龈效果，即排龈疼痛度分析以及对游离龈龈沟宽度（sulcus width，SW）和牙龈退缩量（gingival recession，GR）的影响。方法选择需行固定修复的患者42例，共计52颗患牙，随机分为半导体激光排龈组及单线排龈组，选择26颗正常牙作为空白对照组。采用VRS疼痛数字分级法，评估两种排龈法疼痛度；采用3Shape扫描仪制取排龈前及排龈后即刻、1周、6周的数字化模型，在geomagic qualify 2014软件中，分析比较两种排龈法排龈后SW、GR0、GR1、GR6。结果半导体激光排龈组疼痛度低于单线排龈组（P<0.05）；半导体激光组SW颊=（0.394 2±0.087 3）mm、SW腭=（0.397 4±0.086 8）mm，大于单线排龈组SW颊=（0.322 8±0.057 3）mm、SW腭=（0.306 0±0.050 6）mm（P<0.05）；半导体激光组GR0＝（0.342 5±0.027 9）mm、GR1＝（0.162 5±0.056 9）mm、GR6＝（0.239 3±0.020 6）mm大于单线排龈组GR0＝（0.273 0±0.018 7）mm、GR1＝（0.145 9±0.030 8）mm、GR6＝（0.162 5±0.015 9）mm（P<0.05）。结论半导体激光排龈疼痛度较低，单线排龈法及半导体激光排龈法均能达到良好的龈沟宽度，但二者均会导致永久性龈退缩，且半导体激光排龈后牙龈退缩量较单线排龈法大，故针对厚龈型牙龈建议使用单线排龈。但对于疼痛较为敏感的患者，也可考虑使用激光排龈。

关键词: 单线排龈, 半导体激光, 龈沟宽度, 牙龈退缩

Abstract: Objective To apply digital analysis to compare the clinical gingival retraction effects, including gingival pain degree, sulcus width (SW) and gingival recession (GR), between diode laser method and single cord method. Methods A total of 52 teeth were selected from 42 patients who needed fixed partial denture restoration. They were randomly divided into two groups, diode laser gingival retraction group and single cord gingival retraction group. Twentysix normal teeth were selected as blank control group. VRS digital pain grading method was used to evaluate the pain degree of the two gingival retraction methods, and 3shape scanner was chosen to rebuild digital models before and after gingival retraction at the time point of 0 week, 1st week and 6th week. Finally, the acquired data was input into geomagic qualify 2014 software to compare the gingival effects SW, GR0, GR1 and GR6 before and after gingival displacement. Results The pain level of the diode laser group was lower than that of the single cord group (P<0.05); the SW of diode laser group (buccal (0.394 2±0.087 3)mm, palatal (0.397 4±0.086 8)mm) was greater than the single cord group (buccal (0.322 8±0.057 3) mm, palatal side (0.306 0±0.050 6)mm) (P<0.05); the GR0 (0.342 5±0.027 9)mm, GR1 (0.162 5±0.056 9)mm, and GR6 (0.239 3±0.020 6)mm of the diode laser group were larger than those of the single cord group, GR0 (0.273 0±0.018 7)mm, GR1 (0.145 9±0.030 8)mm, GR6 (0.162 5±0.015 9)mm (P<0.05). Conclusion The diode laser method can lead to lower pain degree. Both two methods can achieve ideal sulcus width, but permanent gingival recession will be caused. The amount of gingival recession after diode laser gingival retraction is larger. Therefore, it is recommended to use single cord method for patients with thick gums, while for patients sensitive to pain, laser method could also be considered.

Key words: single cord gingival retraction, diode laser, width of gingival sulcus, gingival recession

中图分类号:

R783.3

杨贝贝郜珍燕安虹王丽媛. 两种排龈方法排龈效果的数字化分析[J]. 口腔医学, 2021, 41(7): 618-622.

参考文献 21

[1]	许晓波,侯永福,边华琴,王冕,黄炎.超声肩台预备对全冠边缘密合性影响的随机对照研究[J].上海口腔医学,2018,27(03):318-321.
[2]	戴宜君,董研,彭伟,何传鑫,袁喜根.SLM打印钴铬合金基底冠精度及密合性研究[J].实用口腔医学杂志,2018,34(02):158-163.
[3]	Tabassum S, Adnan S, Khan FR. Gingival Retraction Methods: A Systematic Review[J]. J Prosthodont. 2017;26(8):637-643.
[4]	欧阳罡,周欢,赵三军.不同排龈方法对排龈效果影响的对比研究[J].实用口腔医学杂志,2018,34(02):202-205.
[5]	肖芳,史伟萍,葛子瑜,章燕珍.半导体激光在口腔各分支学科中的应用[J].口腔材料器械杂志,2019,28(02):48-52.
[6]	张新媛,孔亚群,吴效民,赵继志.激光在口腔修复中的应用[J].中国实用口腔科杂志,2017,10(01):57-64.
[7]	Akca EA, Yildirim E, Dalkiz M, Yavuzyilmaz H, Beydemir B. Effects of different retraction medicaments on gingival tissue[J]. Quintessence Int. 2006;37(1):53-59.
[8]	Sarmento HR, Leite FR, Dantas RV, Ogliari FA, Demarco FF, Faot F. A double-blind randomised clinical trial of two techniques for gingival displacement[J]. J Oral Rehabil. 2014;41(4):306-313.
[9]	Gutiérrez-Corrales A, Rizcala-Orlando Y, Montero-Miralles P, et al. Comparison of diode laser - Oral tissue interaction to different wavelengths. In vitro study of porcine periodontal pockets and oral mucosa[J]. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2020;25(2):e224-e232.
[10]	许志强,姚江武.数字化口腔修复(21)——半导体激光排龈效果的数字化分析[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2016,32(11):687-690.
[11]	张新媛,董海涛,吴效民,赵继志,李倩.半导体激光排龈法与排龈线排龈法的临床效果对比研究[J].现代口腔医学杂志,2018,32(01):23-24+10.
[12]	陈平雁.定量数据重复测量的方差分析[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2003(01):67-70.
[13]	秦正积,沈毅,王燕南,肖静,何书.三种重复测量资料的统计分析方法比较研究[J].中国卫生统计,2014,31(03):542-545.）
[14]	Ku JK, Leem DH. Vestibuloplasty covering titanium mesh with grafted free gingiva on anterior mandible: technical report and rationale[J]. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;45(6):369-373.
[15]	唐娜娜,张疆弢.牙周生物型的特点和测量方法及其在正畸中的重要作用[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2019,35(04):251-254.
[16]	Melilli D, Mauceri R, Albanese A, Matranga D, Pizzo G. Gingival displacement using diode laser or retraction cords: A comparative clinical study[J]. Am J Dent. 2018;31(3):131-134.
[17]	Krishna Ch V, Gupta N, Reddy KM, Sekhar NC, Aditya V, Reddy GV. Laser gingival retraction: a quantitative assessment[J]. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7(8):1787-1788.
[18]	Chandra S, Singh A, Gupta KK, Chandra C, Arora V. Effect of gingival displacement cord and cordless systems on the closure, displacement, and inflammation of the gingival crevice[J]. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(2):177-182.
[19]	Prasanna GS, Reddy K, Kumar RK, Shivaprakash S. Evaluation of efficacy of different gingival displacement materials on gingival sulcus width[J]. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2013;14(2):217-221.
[20]	Ruel J, Schuessler PJ, Malament K, Mori D. Effect of retraction procedures on the periodontium in humans[J]. J Prosthet Dent. 1980;44(5):508-515.
[21]	Stuffken M, Vahidi F. Preimpression troughing with the diode laser: A preliminary study[J]. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(4):441-446.