期刊文献+

微型种植体支抗与口外弓支抗治疗上牙弓前突的疗效比较 被引量:9

Comparison of micro-implant anchorage with headgear anchorage in treatment of maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的通过与口外弓支抗治疗上牙弓前突的疗效比较,评价微型种植体支抗作用效果。方法将20例严重上牙弓前突的患者随机分成两组,种植体支抗组10例,口外弓支抗组10例,分别应用种植体支抗与口外弓支抗配合MBT直丝弓矫治技术关闭拔牙间隙。通过头影测量方法比较两组患者矫治前、后的反映牙、颌、面形态特征的标志点位置变化,并通过成组t检验分析两组牙、颌、面形态变化的差异。结果矫治后在矢状向上,种植体支抗组上中切牙内收(6.56±1.37)mm,上唇突点后移(4.36±0.79)mm,口外弓支抗组上中切牙内收(5.56±0.66)mm,上唇突点后移(3.86±0.73)mm,两组差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);而两组的上第一磨牙近中移动分别为(0.55±1.36)mm、(1.81±0.84)mm,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。在垂直向上,种植体支抗组上中切牙压低(1.96±0.82)mm,上第一磨牙压低(1.59±1.15)mm,口外弓支抗组上中切牙伸长(0.60±0.74)mm,上第一磨牙伸长(0.24±1.72)mm,两组差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。种植体支抗组U1-SN角减小(16.76±2.85)°、口外弓支抗组U1-SN角减小(20.10±2.09)°,两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论微型种植体支抗不仅具备较强的矢状向支抗作用,同时具备有传统口外弓支抗难以实现的垂直向支抗能力,有效压低前牙以利于矫正深覆、露龈笑畸形,压低上磨牙以利于骨性Ⅱ类面型的改善。 Objective To compare micro-implant anchorage(MIA) with headgear anchorage(HGA) in treatment of maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion.Methods Twenty patients with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion were divided into two groups:patients in group MIA(n=10) were treated with MIA and patients in group HGA(n=10) were treated with HGA as anchorage,MBT straight wire appliance and sliding technique was used to close the extraction space in both groups.Cephalometric analysis was performed to observe the changes of the characteristic lands on the dentofacial morphology before and after the treatment.The data were analyzed by using independent-samples t test.Results After the treatment in MIA group,in sagittal direction the maxillary incisors were retracted(6.56±1.37)mm and the upper lip points were retracted for(4.36±0.79) mm,while in the HGA group the maxillary incisors were retracted for(5.56±0.66) mm and the upper lip points were retracted for(3.86±0.73) mm,there was no significant difference between two groups(P0.05).But the maxillary first molars in MIA group were moved(0.55±1.36)mm and in the HGA group moved(1.81±0.84)mm(P0.05).In the vertical direction,in the MIA group the maxillary incisors were intruded to(1.96±0.82) mm and the maxillary first molars were intruded to(1.59±1.15)mm,while in the HGA group the maxillary incisors and the maxillary first molars were extrudedto(0.60±0.74) mm and(0.24±1.72) mm,respectively (P0.05).In the MIA group U1-SN angles were reduced to(16.76±2.85)°and while in the HGA group reduced to(20.10±2.09)°(P0.05).Conclusion Micro-implants have the same capacity of anchorage control in sagittal direction as headgear anchorage,and have better ability in vertical direction than headgear anchorage and improve the efficacy of maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion significantly.
出处 《同济大学学报(医学版)》 CAS 2011年第5期52-56,71,共6页 Journal of Tongji University(Medical Science)
基金 上海市静安区卫生系统"十百千"人才培养资助项目(2007068043)
关键词 正畸支抗 微型种植体 口外弓 上牙弓前突 Orthodontic anchorage Micro-implants Headgear Maxillary protrusion
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

二级参考文献92

  • 1寻春雷,曾祥龙,王兴.自攻型微钛钉种植体增强磨牙支抗的临床应用研究[J].中华口腔医学杂志,2004,39(6):505-508. 被引量:72
  • 2曾祥龙.正畸种植体支抗的发展、类型与应用[J].口腔正畸学,2005,12(1):44-48. 被引量:85
  • 3Geron S,Shpack N,Kandos S,et al.Anchorage loss-a multifactorial response.Angle Orthod,2003,73:730-737.
  • 4Lee JS,Park HS,Kyung HM.Micro-implant anchorage for lingual treatment of a skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion.J Clin Orthod,2001,35:643-647.
  • 5Park HS,Bac SM,Kyung HM,et al.Micro-implant anchorage for treatment of skeletal Class Ⅰ bialveolar protrusion.J Clin Orthod,2001,35:417-422.
  • 6Ghosh J,Nanda RS.Evaluation of an intraoral maxillary molar distalization technique.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop,1996,110:639-646.
  • 7Ziegler P,Ingervall B.A clinical study of maxillary canine retaction with a retraction spring and with sliding mechanics.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop,1989,95:99-106.
  • 8Rajcich MM,Sadowsky C.Efficacy of intraarch mechanics using differential moments for achieving anchorage control in extraction cases.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop,1997,112:441-448.
  • 9Bjork A.Variations in the growth pattern of the human mandible:longitudinal radiographic study by the implant method.J Dent Rev,1963,42:400-411.
  • 10Crismani AG,Bernhart T,Tangl S,et al.Nasal cavity perforation by palatal implants:false-positive records on the lateral cephalogram.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants,2005,20:267-273.

共引文献97

同被引文献114

引证文献9

二级引证文献35

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