摘要：

目的：对比无牙颌患者行种植体支持整体桥架式修复及分段式修复的种植体成功率，并从咀嚼、发音、美观、舒适性、维护性方面对2种方式进行评价。方法：选择2016年1月1日—2019年12月31日于复旦大学附属中山医院及徐汇区中心医院就诊的无牙颌患者38例，将患者随机分配至研究组（n=19）和观察组（n=19）。研究组采用分段式修复，观察组采用整体桥架式修复。所有患者于修复后1个月、6个月、1年及2年时进行随访。结果：研究组及观察组种植体成功率分别为99.32%和98.68%，修复成功率为99.02%和98.64%。2组在咀嚼食物感受、发音方面未有明显差异（P>0.05），但在义齿舒适度、维护性及美观效果方面，观察组患者评价明显高于研究组（P<0.01）。结论：无牙颌患者种植体支持无论是采用分段式还是整体桥架式修复，均可取得良好的效果，但在舒适度、美观效果及维护性方面，整体桥架式修复方式更好。

关键词: 无牙颌, 种植体支持式义齿修复, 分段式, 全牙弓

Abstract:

Objective: To evaluate the effect of full-arch dental implant restoration and sectional repair in terms of success rate, comfort, mastication, pronunciation, aesthetics, and maintainability evaluation in the edentulous jaw. Methods: 38 edentulous patients admitted to our stomatology department from January 1st, 2016 to December 31th, 2019 were included. The patients were divided into research group(n=19) and observation group(n=19) by random allocation. The research group was treated with full-arch prostheses, while the observation group received sectional repair. All patients were followed up for 1, 6, 12 and 24 months. Results: The implant success rates in the research group and the observation group were 99.32% and 98.68% respectively，while the restoration success rates were 99.02% and 98.64%. There were no significant differences between the two groups in mastication and pronunciation(P>0.05). The aesthetics, comfort and maintainability evaluation scores of observation group were significantly higher than that of research group(P<0.01). Conclusion: Implant-supported prostheses in edentulous patients can receive good results whether full-arch or sectional repair are used. But in terms of comfort, maintenance, and aesthetics, the full-arch dental implant restoration were better than research group.

Key words: edentulous jaw, implant-supported denture restoration, sectional repair, full-arch restoration