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分析

doi:10.12337/zgkqzzxzz.2018.03.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的： 探讨微型种植体支抗与口外弓支抗治疗上牙弓前突的疗效。方法： 选择2015年1月~2016年2月80例上牙弓前突患者分组。对照组实施口外弓支抗治疗上牙弓前突,微型组则采用微型种植体支抗治疗上牙弓前突。比较两组上牙弓前突矫治效果;矫治之后中切牙压低长度、中切牙内收宽度;干预前后患者UI-SN角、LIMP角。结果： 微型组上牙弓前突矫治效果高于对照组,P< 0.05。观察组显效的患者33例,有效6例,无效1例,总有效39 例,总有效率97.50%;对照组显效的患者21 例,有效9 例,无效10 例,总有效30 例,总有效率75.00%。干预前两组UI-SN角、LI-MP角相近,微型组81.31± 3.15°、98.13± 7.11°,对照组81.32± 3.16°、98.13± 7.16°,P> 0.05;干预后微型组UI-SN 角、LI-MP 角优于对照组,微型组78.13± 2.51°、105.24± 8.26°,对照组80.78± 2.46°、99.24± 7.12°P< 0.05。微型组矫治之后中切牙压低长度、中切牙内收宽度2.65± 1.41mm、6.87± 1.83mm大于对照组2.12± 1.01mm、5.12± 1.23mm,P< 0.05。结论： 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,微型种植体支抗效果更好,可更好恢复中切牙压低长度、中切牙内收宽度和头影测量结果,矫治效果良好,值得推广。

关键词: 微型种植体支抗, 口外弓支抗, 上牙弓前突, 疗效, 比较

Abstract: Objective: To investigate the curative effect of mini implant implants and oral arch on the treatment of superior dental arch protrusion. Methods: From January 2015 to February 2016, 80 patients with up-per arch protrusion were selected. In the control group, the maxillary protraction was performed on the arch of the mouth outside the arch, and the mini-implant was used to treat the maxillary protraction. The effect of correction of maxillary arch protrusion was compared between the two groups. After the correc-tion, the length of incisors was reduced and the width of incision was closed. The UI-SN angle and LI-MP angle of patients before and after intervention were compared. Results: The curative effect of maxillary protraction in mini group was higher than that in control group(P<0.05). In the observation group, 33 pa-tients were markedly effective, 6 were effective, 1 was ineffective, 39 were effective, and the total effective rate was 97.50%. In the control group, 21 were markedly effective, 9 effective, 10 ineffective and 30 effec-tive. Efficiency 75.00%. The UI-SN angle and LI-MP angle of the two groups before intervention were 81.31±3.15° and 98.13±7.11° in the mini-group and 81.32±3.16° and 98.13± 7.16° in the control group,respectively the angle of LI-MP was superior to the control group, mini-group 78.13±2.51°, 105.24±8.26°, control group 80.78±2.46°, 99.24±7.12° P<0.05. After the mini group orthodontic treatment, the length of the incisors was 2.65 ± 1.41mm, 6.87 ± 1.83mm larger than that of the control group(2.12 ± 1.01mm, 5.12±1.23mm, P<0.05). Conclusion: Compared with the treatment of superior arch protrusion by mini-implant support, the effect of mini-implant support is better and the reduction of incisors length, incisors width and head shadow measurement results, correction effect is good, it is worth promoting.

Key words: micro implant implants, estuary arch, upper arch protrusion, efficacy, comparison

中图分类号:

782.12

陈文洪. 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分析[J]. 中国口腔种植学杂志, 2018, 23(1): 18-20. DOI: 10.12337/zgkqzzxzz.2018.03.005

CHEN Wenhong. Comparison of the curative effect of mini implant implants and oral arch support on the treatment of superior dental arch protrusion[J].Chinese Journal of Oral Implantology, 2018, 23(1): 18-20.DOI: 10.12337/zgkqzzxzz.2018.03.005.

参考文献

[1] 刘龙坤. 常规矫正与微型种植体支抗用于口腔正畸临床对比研究[J]. 中外医疗, 2016, 35(2): 57-58, 61
[2] 韩韶丰. 常规矫正与微型种植体支抗用于口腔正畸临床效果比照观察[J]. 中国医疗美容, 2016, 6(12): 60-61
[3] 高菲. 微型种植体支抗在口腔正畸临床中的应用研究[J]. 山东医学高等专科学校学报, 2017, 39(1): 35-37
[4] 刘洪, 牟雁东, 于晓光等. 口腔正畸治疗中微型种植体支抗的稳定和安全性[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2016, 20(8): 1159-1164
[5] Zheng, F, Lu,W.F.,Wong,Y.S, et al.An analytical drilling force model and GPU-accelerated haptics-based simula-tion framework of the pilot drilling procedure for micro-implants surgery training[J].Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedi-cine: An International Journal Devoted to the Development, Im-plementation and Exchange of Computing Methodology and Soft-ware Systems in Biomedical Research and Medical Practice,2012, 108(3):1170-1184
[6] 戴兵, 杨柏霞, 王海艳等. 口腔正畸患者微型种植体支抗钉稳定性危险因素的Logistic 回归分析[J]. 川北医学院学报, 2016, 31(3): 400-402, 406
[7] 孙洁, 邓立兰, 凌燕等. 微型种植体支抗在青少年口腔正畸治疗中的效果及安全性[J]. 现代生物医学进展,2016, 16(9): 1742-1744
[8] B.S. Necula,I. Apachitei, L.E.Fratila-Apachitei et al. Titanium bone implants with superimposed micro/nano-scale porosity and antibacterial capability[J]. Applied Surface Science:A Journal Devoted to the Properties of Interfaces in Relation to the Synthesis and Behaviour of Materials, 2013, 273(May 15):310-314
[9] 吴昌敬, 王蔚璐, 甄恩明等. 微型种植体支抗技术用于前牙列拥挤Ⅲ度以上患者治疗中的价值研究[J]. 中国口腔种植学杂志, 2016, 21(2): 74-77
[10] 王利辉. 成人口腔正畸应用微型种植体支抗的效果观察[J]. 临床医学, 2016, 36(8): 93-94
[11] Jawad, M.M, Husein,A.,Alam, M.K, et al.Overview of non-inva-sive factors (low level laser and low intensity pulsed ultrasound)accelerating tooth movement during orthodontic treatment[J]. La-sers in medical science, 2014, 29(1): 367-372
[12] 曹芳. 微螺钉种植体支抗与口外弓增强支抗在口腔畸形矫正中的临床疗效对比[J]. 吉林医学, 2015,(16): 3522-3523
[13] 苟颖. 微螺钉种植体支抗在口腔正畸中的临床效果分析[J]. 医药前沿, 2016, 6(6): 256-257
[14] DANIELA JUMANCA, ATENA GALUSCAN, AN-GELA CODRUTA PODARIU, et al. Infiltration Therapy - an Al-ternative to Fluoride Varnish Application for Treatment of White Spot Lesion After Fixed Orthodontic Treatment[J]. Revista de Chimie, 2012, 63(8): 783-786
[15] 岳士超, 杜跃华, 唐晓君等. 微镙钉种植体支抗与口外支抗对正畸前后上颌或双颌前突变化的Meta分析[J].中国组织工程研究, 2012, 16(21): 3881-3885