期刊文献+

安氏Ⅱ类错拔牙与非拔牙矫治病例牙槽嵴吸收的对比研究 被引量:1

Alveolar bone crest absorption between extraction and non-extraction treatment in Class II malocclusion
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的:了解拔牙与非拔牙矫治在治疗安氏II类错时牙槽嵴高度的变化情况。方法:选取双期矫治病例16例,摆式矫治器病例18例及拔牙矫治病例20例,治疗前后均拍摄上前牙根尖片,比较上前牙治疗前后"CEJ-AC距离"在三个治疗组中的平均变化量,并作方差分析及组间LSD-t检验。结果:治疗结束时,三治疗组的CEJ-AC变化量存在组间差别,并具有统计学意义(p<0.05),其中双期矫治组和摆式矫治器组的CEJ-AC分别增加了0.19mm和0.21mm,两组间无统计学差异(p>0.05),均小于拔牙矫治组的0.41mm,并有显著的统计意义(p<0.001)。三治疗组在治疗结束时的CEJ-AC距离均不超过2mm。结论:双期矫治、摆式矫治器及拔牙矫治在治疗安氏II类错时,均会造成牙槽嵴高度下降,其中拔牙矫治的下降程度较为严重,但三种方法均未造成具有临床意义的牙槽骨丧失。 Objective: Research the change in alveolar bone crest height among 2-phase treatment,pendulum and extraction treatment in Class II malocclusion. Method: 16 cases of 2-phase treatment, 18 cases of pendulum treatment and 20 cases of extraction treatment are chosen. Radiograms of maxillary incisors before and after treatment are analysed. Compare the change in CEJ-AC distance among three treatment groups. ANOVA and LSD-t test analysis are performed. Result: After treatment, there is statistical difference in CEJ-AC distance among three treatment group (P〈0.05). CEJ-AC distance increase by 0.19 mm and 0.21 mm in 2-phses group and pendulum group respectively. There is no statistical difference between these two groups (P〉0.05). CEJ-AC distance increase by 0.41 mm in extraction group,larger than any other group (P〈0.001). After treatment, CEJ-AC distance in all three group are less than 2 mm. Conclusion: Alveolar bone crest height become lower after 2-phase treatment, pendulum and extraction treatment in Class Ⅱ malocclusion. This situation is more serious in extraction group than any other group. There is no kgn of alveolar bone lose in three treatment groups.
出处 《临床口腔医学杂志》 2009年第3期157-159,共3页 Journal of Clinical Stomatology
基金 2005年广州市卫生局科研立项项目资助(2005-YB-178) 2007年广州市卫生局科研立项项目资助(2007-YB-057)
关键词 安氏Ⅱ类错[牙合] 拔牙 非拔牙 牙槽嵴吸收 Class II malocclusion: extraction: non-extraction: alveolar bone crest absorption
  • 相关文献

参考文献11

  • 1Reed BE,Poison AM,Subtelny JD. Long-term prriedontal status of teeth moved into extraction site [J]. Am J Orthed Dentofacial Orthop, 1985,88: 203-208.
  • 2Bondemark L. Interdental bone changes after orthodontic treatment: a 5-year longitudinal study [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998, 114:25-31.
  • 3Aass AM, Gjermo P. Changes in radiographic bone level in orthodontically treated teenagers over a 4-year period [J]. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 1992, 20: 90-93.
  • 4SRichmond, WCshaw, KDO'Brien, et al. The development of the PAR index (Peer Assessment Rating) : reliability and validity [J]. European Journal of Orthodontics, 1992, 14: 125-139.
  • 5SRchimond,WCshaw, CTRoberts,et al. The PAR index (Peer Assessment Rating) : methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards [J]. European Journal of Orthodontics, 1992, 14: 180-187.
  • 6Guiherme J,Roberto B,Analu G B,et al. Comparative radiographic evaluation of the alveolar bone crest after orthodontic treatment [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofaeial Orthop, 2003, 124: 157-164.
  • 7Bondemark L. Interdental bone changes after orthodontic treatment: a 5-year longitudinal study [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998,114:25-31.
  • 8翟佳羽 刘继辉 任琼 等.安氏Ⅱ类错殆的双期及一期矫治的牙根吸收对比研究.口腔疾病防治杂志,2006,8:1-5.
  • 9Albandar JM, Rise J, Gjermo P, et al. Radiographic quantification of alveolar bone level changes-a 2-year longitudinal study in man [J]. J Clin Periodontol, 1986, 13: 195-200.
  • 10邹兆菊.口腔颌面X线诊断学[M].(第2版).北京:人民卫生出版社,1993.18.

同被引文献7

引证文献1

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部