New Distalizer矫治器与Pendulum矫治器推磨牙远中移动的疗效比较

Comparision of Treatment Effects on Molar Distal Movement by Two Appliances: New Distalizer Appliance and Pendulum Appliance

目的:比较New distalizer矫治器与Pendulum矫治器2种方法推磨牙远中移动的临床疗效。方法:选择24例牙源性安氏Ⅱ类错轻、中度拥挤病例,按照配对实验设计的原理分为2组,分别使用New distalizer矫治器(N组)和Pendulum矫治器(P组)进行不拔牙矫治。矫治前后拍摄头颅侧位片,采用Pancherz分析法进行头影测量分析,比较2组矫治前后牙颌结构的变化。结果:两种矫治器的戴用时间上,N组明显短于P组,P<0.01;矫治前后相比较,两组磨牙远中移动效果明显,但磨牙远中倾斜N组1.0°±0.8°,P组3.7°±0.8°,两组的差异具有显著性(P<0.05);N组上颌前牙唇向倾斜1.2°±1.7°,改变不明显,P组2.4°±2.4°,矫治前后的比较具有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论:在本研究中两种矫治器都能有效推磨牙远移,但New distalizer矫治器表现出快速、整体地上颌磨牙远中移动,前牙支抗消耗相对要低。

Objective： To compare the treatment effects of new distalizer appliance and pendulum appliance on the distal movement of maxillary first molars. Methods： Twenty-four patients who had odontogentic Angle Ⅱ and mild-moderate crowded malocclusion were randomly divided into two groups, of which Group N were treated with new distalizer appliances, while Group P with pendulum appliances. Cephalometric radiographs were taken and analyzed by Pancherz method before and after treatment. Results： There was significant difference between Group N and Group P in the treatment duration （3.1±1.4 months versus 6.2±3.6 months, P〈0.01）. There was also significant difference in the changes of ms-SN slant （1.0°±0.8° versus 3.7°±0.8°,P〈0.05） between the two groups. Conclusion. The results indicate that both appliances are the effective methods for the treatment of distal movement of maxillary first molars, and new distalizer appliance is clinically more effective and rapid for distal movement of the maxillary first molars.