Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Flap folding suture¸¦ È°¿ëÇÑ ÆǸ·ÀÇ °íÁ¤¿¡ µû¸¥ ÀÓÇöõÆ® ÁÖº¯ ¿¬Á¶Á÷ 3Â÷¿ø ºÎÇÇ º¯È­ °üÂû

3D analysis of soft tissue around implant after flap folding suture

±¸°­È¸º¹ÀÀ¿ë°úÇÐÁö 2021³â 37±Ç 3È£ p.130 ~ 137
Á¤¼¼¿µ, °­´ë¿µ, ½ÅÇö½Â, ¹ÚÁ¤Ã¶,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Á¤¼¼¿µ ( Jung Sae-Young ) - Dankook University College of Dentistry Department of Periodontology
°­´ë¿µ ( Kang Dae-Young ) - Dankook University Dental Hospital Department of Periodontology
½ÅÇö½Â ( Shin Hyun-Seung ) - Dankook University College of Dentistry Department of Periodontology
¹ÚÁ¤Ã¶ ( Park Jung-Chul ) - Dankook University College of Dentistry Department of Periodontology

Abstract

¸ñÀû: ´Ù¾çÇÑ ºÀÇÕ¼úÀ» ÅëÇØ ÀÓÇöõÆ® ÁÖº¯¿¡ ÃÖÀûÈ­µÈ °¢È­Á¡¸·À» È®º¸ÇÏ·Á´Â ½Ãµµ°¡ ÁøÇàµÇ¾ú´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀº ÀÓÇöõÆ® ½Ä¸³ ÈÄ 2°³ÀÇ ¼­·Î ´Ù¸¥ ºÀÇÕ¼ú ½ÃÇà ÈÄ ¿¬Á¶Á÷ÀÇ Ä¡À¯ ¾ç»óÀ» Æò°¡ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù.

¿¬±¸ Àç·á ¹× ¹æ¹ý: 15¸íÀÇ È¯ÀÚ¿¡¼­ 18°³ÀÇ ÀÓÇöõÆ®°¡ ½Ä¸³µÇ¾ú°í ¿¬±¸¿¡ Æ÷ÇԵǾú´Ù. ºÎ°¡ÀûÀÎ °ñÀÌ½Ä ¾øÀÌ ´Ü¼ø ÀÓÇöõÆ® ½Ä¸³¸¸ ÁøÇàÇÏ¿´´Ù. 2°³ÀÇ ¼­·Î ´Ù¸¥ ºÀÇÕ¼úÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇØ paramarginal flap designÀ» ½ÃÇàÇÑ ÇùÃø ÆǸ·À» ÀÓÇöõÆ® Ä¡À¯ Áö´ëÁÖ ÇϹæÀ¸·Î °íÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. µðÁöÅÐ ±¸³» ½ºÄ³³Ê¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ÃÊÁø, ¼ö¼ú Á÷ÈÄ, ¹ß»ç, 3°³¿ù ½ÃÁ¡¿¡ ½ºÄµÀ» ÁøÇàÇÏ¿´´Ù. °¢ ½ÃÁ¡¿¡ µû¸¥ ½ºÄµ µ¥ÀÌÅ͸¦ ÀÎÁ¢Ä¡ÀÇ ±³µÎ, ¼Ò¿Í, Ä¡À¯Áö´ëÁÖ µîÀÇ ¿©·¯ Á¡µéÀ» ±âÁØÀ¸·Î ÃÊÁø µ¥ÀÌÅÍ¿Í ÁßøÇÏ¿´´Ù. °¢ ½ÃÁ¡ÀÇ ½ºÄµ µ¥ÀÌÅ͸¦ ÃÊÁø µ¥ÀÌÅÍ¿Í subtractionÇÑ ´ÙÀ½ ÀÓÇöõÆ® ÁÖÀ§ ¿¬Á¶Á÷ÀÇ Áõ°¡·®¿¡ ÇØ´çÇÏ´Â Æó°î¸éÀÇ ºÎÇǸ¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Æó°î¸éÀÇ ºÎÇÇ´Â mm3 ´ÜÀ§·Î °èÃøÇÏ¿´´Ù. 3°³ ½ÃÁ¡¿¡¼­ 2°³ÀÇ ¼­·Î ´Ù¸¥ ºÀÇÕ¼ú¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ ºÎÇÇ º¯È­¸¦ ºñ±³Çϱâ À§ÇØ nonparametric rank-based ºÐ¼®À» ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á°ú: ¾çÂÊ ±º ¸ðµÎ Ä¡À¯´Â ¾çÈ£ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¾çÂÊ ºÀÇÕ±ºÀº ¼ö¼ú ÈÄ Áï½Ã ¿¬Á¶Á÷ ºÎÇÇÀÇ Áõ°¡¸¦ º¸¿©ÁÖ¾ú´Ù. 3°³¿ù¿¡ °ÉÃÄ ºÎÇÇ´Â ½Ã°£¿¡ µû¶ó À¯ÀǼº ÀÖ°Ô °¨¼ÒÇÏ¿´´Ù(P < 0.001). Flap folding suture ±ºÀÇ ¿¬Á¶Á÷ ºÎÇÇ´Â 3°³¿ù ½ÃÁ¡¿¡¼­ interrupted suture ±ºº¸´Ù ´õ¿í ³ôÀº Áß¾Ó°ªÀ» º¸¿´À¸³ª Åë°èÀû À¯ÀǼºÀº ¾ø¾ú´Ù(P > 0.05).

°á·Ð: ÀÓÇöõÆ® ½ÃÇà ½Ã paramarginal flap ÇüÅ·Π°Å»óµÈ ÆǸ·À» flap folding suture·Î °íÁ¤ÇÑ ±ºÀº 3°³¿ù Ä¡À¯ ±â°£ ÈÄ interrupted suture ±ºº¸´Ù ´õ¿í ³ôÀº ¿¬Á¶Á÷ Áõ°­ ¼öÄ¡¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù. ÇÏÁö¸¸ Á»´õ Àå±âÀûÀÎ °üÂû ¿¬±¸°¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.

Purpose: The various suture techniques can be utilized in order to maximize the keratinized tissue healing around dental implants. The aim of this study is to compare the soft tissue healing pattern between two different suture techniques after implant placement.

Materials and Methods: 15 patients with 18 implants were enrolled in this study. Simple implant placement without any additional bone graft was performed. Two different suture techniques were used to tug in the mobilized flap near the healing abutment after paramarginal flap design. Digital intraoral scan was performed at baseline, post-operation, stitch out, and 3 months after operation. The scan data were aligned using multiple points such as cusp, fossa of adjacent teeth, and/or healing abutment. After subtracting scan data at baseline with other time-point results, closed space indicating volume increment of peri-implant mucosa was selected. The volume of the close space was measured in mm3. The volume between two suture techniques at three time-points was compared using nonparametric rank-based analysis.

Results: Healing was uneventful in both groups. Both suture technique groups showed increased soft tissue volume immediately after surgery. The amount of volume increment significantly decreased after 3 months (P < 0.001). Flap folding suture group showed higher median of volume increment than interrupted suture group after 3 months without any statistical significance (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: After paramarginal flap reflection, the raised flaps stabilized by flap folding suture showed relatively higher volume maintenance after 3-month healing period. However, further studies are warranted.

Å°¿öµå

Ä¡°ú ÀÓÇöõÆ®; °¢È­Á¡¸·; ±¸³» ½ºÄ³³Ê; Àӻ󿬱¸
dental implant; keratinized mucosa; sutures; intraoral scanner; clinical trial

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI