微型种植体支抗和传统正畸在口腔正畸患者中的疗效对比观察

Comparison of curative effect between Mini implant anchorage and orthodontics in orthodontic patients

目的探讨微型种植体支抗在口腔正畸患者中的临床效果。方法选择2015年12月-2017年12月入院治疗的口腔正畸患者120例,根据治疗方法不同分为对照组(n=60例)和观察组(n=60例)。对照组采用传统正畸治疗,观察组采用微型种植体支抗治疗,两组均连续治疗6个月,治疗完毕后对患者效果进行评估。采用X线对患者治疗前、治疗后6个月磨牙移位、上中切牙凸距离差、上中切牙倾角差进行测定;采用美观满意调查表对两组患者修复后12个月从整体美观、修复体色泽、修复体外形、颜色不配、牙齿松动角度进行评估;采用酶联免疫吸附试验测定两组治疗前、治疗后6个月白细胞介素-1β(IL-1β)、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)和白细胞介素-8(IL-8)水平;记录并统计两组治疗后口腔炎症、组织水肿、渗血及不适发生率,比较两组临床疗效。结果观察组经微型种植体支抗治疗后6个月磨牙移位,少于对照组(P<0.05);观察组上中切牙凸距离差、上中切牙倾角差,均大于对照组(P<0.05);观察组烤瓷熔附金属修复体修复后6个月整体美观、修复体色泽、修复体外形、颜色不配、牙齿松动评分,均高于对照组(P<0.05);观察组治疗后6个月IL-1β、IL-6及IL-8,均低于对照组(P<0.05);观察组治疗后6个月口腔炎症、组织水肿、渗血及不适发生率与对照组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论将微型种植体支抗用于口腔正畸患者中效果理想,炎症反应相对较轻,安全性能较高,值得推广应用。

Objective To investigate the clinical effect of micro-implant anchorage in orthodontic patients. Methods A total of 120 orthodontic patients admitted to hospital from December 2015 to December 2017 were selected and divided into control group（n=60） and observation group（n=60） according to different treatment methods. The control group was treated with traditional orthodontic treatment. The observation group was treated with mini-implant anchorage. The two groups were treated continuously for 6 months. After the treatment was completed, the effect of the patient was evaluated. X-rays were used to determine the displacement of the molars, the distance between the convexities of the upper middle incisors, and the difference in the inclination angle of the upper middle incisors before and after the treatment. The aesthetic satisfaction questionnaire was used to treat the two groups from 12 months after the repair. Appearance, restoration color, restoration shape, color mismatch, and loose tooth angle were evaluated; enzymelinked immunosorbent assay was used to determine interleukin-1β（IL-1β） and interleukin in the two groups before and 6 months after treatment.-6（IL-6） and interleukin-8（IL-8） levels; records and statistics of oral inflammation, tissue edema, bleeding and discomfort after treatment in the two groups, the clinical efficacy of the two groups were compared. Results In the observation group, the displacement of the molars was less than 6 months after the treatment with the microimplant anchorage（P〈0.05）. The distance between the convex teeth of the central incisor and the inclination angle of the upper incisor was lower in the observation group than in the control group.（P〈0.05）; In the observation group, the overall appearance, restoration color, restoration shape, color mismatch and tooth loosening scores of the porcelain-fused metal restoration after 6 months were higher than those of the control group（P〈0.05）; The levels of IL-1β, IL-6 and IL-8 in the group were lower than those in the control group at 6 months after treatment（P〈0.05）. The incidences of oral inflammation, tissue edema, bleeding and discomfort in the observation group at 6 months after treatment were compared with those of the control group. There was no significant difference between the groups（P〈0.05）. Conclusion The application of micro-implant anchorage in orthodontic patients is satisfactory, the inflammatory response is relatively light, and the safety performance is high. It is worthy of popularization and application.