两种支抗配合MBT直丝弓技术矫治双颌前突的效果比较

Comparison between J-hook and micro-implant anchorage in the treatment of patients with bimaxillary protrusion

目的比较J钩和种植体支抗配合MBT直丝弓技术矫治双颌前突病例的矫治效果，以及支抗对磨牙的控制作用。方法30例需最大支抗的双颌前突病例（男性12例，女性18例），采用MBT直丝弓矫治技术，分别配合J钩（15例，A组）和种植体支抗（15例，B组）控制磨牙，对治疗前后的头颅侧位X线片进行头影测量分析，并对结果进行统计学分析。结果虽然矫治前A组和B组U6C—PP分别为（12．4±0．2）mm和（12．5±0．1）mm，治疗后两组U6C—PP分别为（12．6±0．1）mm和（12．8±0．1）mm，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01），但两组矫治结果临床差异不显著；两组其余指标差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论J钩和种植体支抗配合MBT技术矫治双颌前突病例，均能控制支抗磨牙，且在支抗控制上两者无明显差异。

Objective To compare the difference between J-hook and micro-implant anchorage in the treatment of patient with bimaxillary protrusion. Methods Thirty patients with bimaxillary protrusion were divided into two groups （J-hook and micro-implant groups） and treated with MBT appliance. Four first premolars were extracted in all patients. Cephalometric analyses were carried out before and after treatment. Results In J-hook group and micro-implant group,computerized cephalometric analysis revealed that before treatment U6C-PP was （ 12. 4 ±0. 2） mm and （ 12. 5 ±0. 1 ） mm,respectively,and after treatment U6C-PP was （ 12.6 ±0. 1 ） mm and （ 12. 8 ±0. 1 ） mm,respectively. The difference between J-hook group and microimplant group was significant（ P 〈 0. 01 ）. The other differences of cephalometric analyses between J-hook group and micro-implant group was not significant. Conclusions Both J-hook and micro-implant could provide adequate anchorage in the treatment of patients with bimaxillary protrusion.