Russian Federation
Ekaterinburg, Ekaterinburg, Russian Federation
Ekaterinburg, Ekaterinburg, Russian Federation
Predmet. Al'veoloplastika — kostnoplasticheskaya operaciya, neobhodimaya v lechenii i reabilitacii pacientov s vrozhdennoy rasschelinoy verhney guby, neba i al'veolyarnogo otrostka. Cel'. Ocenit' effektivnost' primeneniya biodegradiruemoy membrany pri plastike vrozhdennogo defekta al'veolyarnogo otrostka, a takzhe vozmozhnosti KLKT v harakteristike rezul'tatov al'veoloplastiki u pacientov s vrozhdennoy rasschelinoy al'veolyarnogo otrostka. Metodologiya. Oceneny rezul'taty diagnostiki i lecheniya 79 pacientov s vrozhdennoy rasschelinoy al'veolyarnogo otrostka, kotorym byla vypolnena al'veoloplastika. Zaklyucheniya osuschestvlyalis' dvumya nezavisimymi ekspertami (vrachom-rentgenologom i vrachom — chelyustno-licevym hirurgom) putem analiza KLKT, soglasovannost' ocenok issledovateley — posredstvom vychisleniya kappy Koena. Statisticheskiy analiz dannyh provodilsya na personal'nom komp'yutere s pomosch'yu paketov programm SPSSInc/Statistics17 i Microsoft Office Excel, vychisleniya izmenchivosti izmereniy razmerov regeneratov — graficheskim metodom Blanda — Al'tmana. Znachimost' rezul'tatov issledovaniya vychislyalas' s pomosch'yu t-kriteriya St'yudenta. Rezul'taty. Srednie razmery (tolschina, dlina, vysota) poluchennogo regenerata zaregistrirovany luchshe v gruppe al'veoloplastik s membranoy. Blagopriyatnyh rezul'tatov al'veoloplastiki (I, II tipy po Bergland i kategorii A i C po Chelsea) bol'she v gruppe pacientov, kotorym provedena al'veoloplastika s ispol'zovaniem membrany, — 85,3 i 55,5 % sootvetstvenno po shkalam (bez ispol'zovaniya membrany — 53,2 i 46,8 % sootvetstvenno). Neblagopriyatnyh rezul'tatov al'veoloplastiki (III, IV tipy po Bergland) bol'she v gruppe al'veoloplastik bez membrany — 46,8 % (s membranoy — 24,7 %). Vyvody. Naibolee blagopriyatnye rezul'taty konsolidacii regenerata s materinskoy kost'yu po stepeni prileganiya regenerata i po rentgenologicheskim klassifikaciyam Bergland i Chelsea polucheny v gruppe al'veoloplastik s ispol'zovaniem biodegradiruemoy membrany. KLKT pozvolyaet vizualizirovat' kostnyy regenerat vo vseh ploskostyah i tem samym dat' tochnuyu, ob'ektivnuyu, vosproizvodimuyu informaciyu o kachestve regenerata s vysokoy stepen'yu soglasovannosti mezhdu issledovatelyami.
vrozhdennaya rasschelina al'veolyarnogo otrostka, konusno-luchevaya komp'yuternaya tomografiya, al'veoloplastika, kriterii ocenki regenerata
1. Petrovskaya V. V., Blokhina N. I. [The role of microfocus radiography in the dynamic control of patients with congenital alveolar clefts at the stage of bone-plastic surgery]. Radiologiya-praktika = Radiology-Practice, 2014, no. 3, pp. 6-14. (in Russ).
2. Blokhina N. I. [Comparative analysis of diagnostic images using orthopantomography, intraoral occlusion radiography and microfocus radiography in the evaluation of bone tissue regeneration in patients with congenital alveolar cleft after bone plaque]. Aspirant = Post-graduate doctor, 2013, no. 3, pp. 4-11. (in Russ).
3. Saleeva G. T., Yarulina Z. I., Sedov Yu. G., Mikhalev P. N. [Clinical and radiological evaluation of jaw bone augmentation according to the cone-beam computer tomography]. Vestnik sovremennoy klinicheskoy meditsiny = Bulletin of modern clinical medicine, 2014, vol. 7, pp. 27-31. (in Russ).
4. Serova N. S. Luchevaya diagnostika v stomatologicheskoy implantologii [Radiodiagnosis in dental implantology]. Moscow, E-noto, 2015, 220 p.
5. Shleiko V. A., Zholudev S. E. [Computer tomography as the main tool in planning and predicting complex dental treatment]. Problemy stomatologii = Dentistry problems, 2013, no. 2, pp. 33-57. (in Russ).
6. Albuquerque M. A., Gaia B. F., Gusmao M. Comparison between multislice and cone-beam computerized tomography in the volumetric assessment of cleft palate. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Patho. l Oral Radiol. Endod, 2011, no. 112, pp. 249-257.
7. Jorge A. V., Freitas R. S., Alonso N. Use of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography to Classify Filling of Alveolar Bone Grafting. Plastic Surgery Inter, 2012, pp. 1-5.
