Abstract:

Objective　To compare the adaptive differences between two standard artificial temporomandibular joint replacement systems and Chinese bone structure. Methods    Totally 54 patients（63 joints） treated by temporomandibular joint replacement from January 2010 to December 2016 were evaluated. Their CT data before operation were measured for the amount of bone trimming including fossa，ramus and bone graft in the fossa by ProPlan CMF 1.4 software. SPSS 17.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Results　The amount of fossa and ramus bone trimming and fossa bone graft in the self-designed prostheses was significantly less than that in the Biomet prostheses ［（150.20 ± 125.86）mm3 vs（281.82 ± 188.26）mm3，（103.86 ± 64.07）mm3 vs（229.45 ± 159.35）mm3 and （95.88 ± 74.72）mm3 vs（263.03 ± 187.00）mm3，P＜0.001］. Conclusion　Self-designed artificial joint replacement system is more suitable for Chinese bone structure than the Biomet system with less bone trimming and grafting.

Key words: standard artificial temporomandibular joint, bone trimming and graft

摘要：

目的　比较两种标准型人工颞下颌关节置换系统（Biomet和自主设计）与中国人骨性结构的适应性差异。方法    选择2010年1月至2016年12月上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院口腔外科收治的颞下颌关节全关节置换病例54例（63侧关节），采用计算机辅助外科技术为其选型和模拟安装Biomet标准型人工颞下颌关节置换系统与自主设计的标准型人工颞下颌关节置换系统，采用ProPlan CMF 1.4软件测量两种置换系统关节窝骨修整量、下颌支骨修整量和关节窝植骨量，并进行比较。结果　自主设计的标准型人工颞下颌关节置换系统的关节窝骨修整量、下颌支骨修整量和关节窝植骨量分别为（150.20 ± 125.86）、（103.86 ± 64.07）和（95.88 ± 74.72）mm3，均显著少于Biomet标准型人工颞下颌关节置换系统的（281.82 ± 188.26）、（229.45 ± 159.35）和（263.03 ± 187.00）mm3，二者比较差异均有统计学意义（均P＜0.001）。结论　自主设计的标准型人工颞下颌关节置换系统更适合中国人的骨性结构，具有去骨量和关节窝植骨量少的优点。

关键词: 标准型人工颞下颌关节, 骨修整