中国医科大学学报

中国医科大学学报
  • 中文核心期刊
  • 中国科技核心期刊
  • 中国高校百佳科技期刊
  • BA、CA收录

中国医科大学学报 ›› 2018, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (9): 829-833.doi: 10.12007/j.issn.0258-4646.2018.09.014

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

骨性Ⅱ类错(牙合)双期矫治与单期矫治疗效的对比

韩丽丽1,2, 代昕3, 侯志明2   

  1. 1. 抚顺市口腔病防治院, 辽宁 抚顺 113008;
    2. 中国医科大学口腔医学院正畸一科, 辽宁省口腔医学研究所正畸研究室, 辽宁省口腔疾病转化医学研究中心, 沈阳 110002;
    3. 沈阳和平艾莉口腔门诊, 沈阳 110002
  • 收稿日期:2018-03-05 出版日期:2018-09-30 发布日期:2018-09-08
  • 通讯作者: 侯志明 E-mail:371807087@qq.com
  • 作者简介:韩丽丽(1985-),女,主治医师,硕士.
  • 基金资助:
    沈阳市科学技术计划(F14-158-9-39)

Comparison of the Efficacy of One-phase and Two-phase Treatment on Skeletal Class Ⅱ Malocclusion

HAN Lili1,2, DAI Xin3, HOU Zhiming2   

  1. 1. Fushun Oral Disease Prevention and Treatment Institute, Fushun 113008, China;
    2. The 1 st Orthodontics Department, School of Stomatology, China Medical University, Liaoning Province Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Department of Orthodontics, Liaoning Province Translational Medicine Research Center of Oral Diseases, Shenyang 110002, China;
    3. Shenyang Heping Ailly Dental Clinic, Shenyang 110002, China
  • Received:2018-03-05 Online:2018-09-30 Published:2018-09-08

摘要: 目的 比较骨性Ⅱ类错(牙合)双期矫治的治疗效果是否优于单期矫治。方法 收集12例进行双期矫治的骨性Ⅱ类患者(双期组),同时选取主要指标与双期组相近的12例进行单期矫治的骨性Ⅱ类患者(单期组)。对比分析2组患者治疗前6项及治疗后44项头影测量指标的差异。结果 2组患者矫治前6项X线头影测量主要指标的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗后双期组ANB角[(2.97±0.63)°]、FMA角[(25.90±6.27)°]小于单期组[ANB角,(4.15±0.79)°;FMA角,(34.17±7.29)°],U1-NA角[(24.93±5.19)°]大于单期组[(18.78±4.50)°],差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。矫治后双期组U1-AP距[(4.70±1.29)mm]小于单期组[(6.53±2.68)mm],差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 双期矫治后患者骨性远中关系、垂直骨面型、上前牙唇倾度及突度比单期矫治效果更好。

关键词: 骨性Ⅱ类错(牙合), 双期矫治, 单期矫治, 头影测量

Abstract: Objective To compare the efficacy of one-phase and two-phase treatment on skeletal class Ⅱ malocclusion. Methods We enrolled 12 patients with skeletal class Ⅱ malocclusion who underwent two-phase treatment and 12 patients who underwent one-phase treatment; we then matched patients on the basis of important indexes. Respective cephalometric analyses, comprising 6 and 44 indexes, were performed before and after treatment. Results There was no significant difference between the two groups in the 6 indexes of X-ray cephalometric measurements before treatment. After treatment, ANB and FMA angles were significantly smaller in the two-phase treatment group than in the one-phase treatment group (ANB angle, 2.97°±0.63° vs 4.15°±0.79°; FMA angle, 25.90°±6.27° vs 34.17°±7.29°). The U1-NA angle was significantly larger in the two-phase treatment group than in the one-phase treatment group(24.93°±5.19° vs 18.78°±4.50°), while U1-AP distance was smaller in the two-phase treatment group than in the one-phase treatment group(4.70±1.29 vs 6.53±2.68 mm). Conclusion In patients undergoing two-phase treatment, better correction is achieved in the osseous distance relationship, facial type tends to be more average, upper incisor lip gradient degree is closer to normal, and the upper incisor exhibits ideal protrusion.

Key words: skeletal class Ⅱ malocclusion, two-phase treatment, one-phase treatment, cephalometry

中图分类号: 

  • R78.3
[1] OH H, BAUMRIND S, KOM EL, et al. A retrospective study of class Ⅱ mixed-dentition treatment[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017, 87(1):56-67. DOI:10.2319/012616-72.1.
[2] ARAS I, PASAOGLU A, OLMEZ S, et al. Comparison of stepwise vs single-step advancement with the functional mandibular advancer in class Ⅱ division 1 treatment[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017, 87(1):82-87. DOI:10.2319/032416-241.1.
[3] ISHAQ RA, AIHAMMADI MS, FAYED MM, et al. Fixed functional appliances with multibracket have no skeletal effect on the mandible:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Am J Orhtod Dentofacial Orthop, 2016, 149(5):612-624. DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.11.023.
[4] AI-JEWAIR TS. Meta-analysis on the mandibular dimensions effects of the MARA appliance in patients with class Ⅱ malocclusions[J]. Angle Orthod, 2015, 85(4):706-714. DOI:10.2319/052814-378.1.
[5] KORETSI V, ZYMPERDIKAS VF, PAPAGEORGIOU SN, et al. Treatment effects of removable functional appliances in patients with class Ⅱ malocclusion:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2015, 37(4):418-434. DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju071.
[6] DOLCE C, MCGORRAY SP, BRAZEAU L, et al. Timing of class Ⅱ treatment:skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase treatment[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2007, 132(4):481-489. DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.08.046.
[7] PROFFIT WR, FIELEL HW. Contemperary Orthodontics[M]. 3rd ed. St. Louis:Mosby-year Book, 1999:274-275.
[8] JANSON G, SATHLER R, FERNANDES TM, et al. Correction of class Ⅱ malocclusion with class Ⅱ elastics:a systematic review[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2013, 143(3):383-392. DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.10.015.
[9] 代昕, 侯志明, 赵震锦, 等. 反映正畸后侧貌美观指标及其标准研究[J]. 中国实用口腔科杂志, 2008, 1(6):340-342. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-1595.2008.06.007.
[1] 赵震锦,王丽萍,郑雪松,赵瑞,刘帅. 侧貌美观评价的影响因素[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2017, 46(6): 540-543.
[2] 翟俊辉,原工杰,吴平. 单颌拔除第一前磨牙矫治成人骨性Ⅱ类错牙合的临床疗效[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2014, 43(2): 175-177.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 徐国帅, 蔡相军, 陈江波, 吕庆, 刘洪涛. AEG-1和CHD5在胃癌中的表达及其临床意义[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(9): 797 -802 .
[2] 吴越, 周祖华, 闻庆平, 苗壮. 葛根素对大鼠背根神经节神经病理性疼痛的镇痛作用[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(9): 803 -806 .
[3] 方芳, 丁爽, 吴春玲, 段宏梅, 刘海娜, 肖卫国. Noggin阻断BMP-7/Smad信号通路对类风湿关节炎成纤维样滑膜细胞增殖及IL-6、IL-8表达的影响[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(9): 816 -819 .
[4] 邓杰尹, 秦杨, 陈小燕, 李改丽, 李运明. 高龄男性冠状动脉钙化与痴呆、冠状动脉粥样硬化性心脏病的相关性[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(9): 820 -823 .
[5] 刘仁杰, 刘俊杰, 张尧, 王婧瑶, 王一超, 张婧曦, 梁文吉, 赵雅宁, 李建民. 亚低温通过调控内质网应激激活自噬改善蛛网膜下腔出血大鼠早期脑损伤[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(9): 824 -828,833 .
[6] 刘畅, 柯艳, 赵丽, 崇巍. 急性消化道出血患者心肌损伤的危险因素分析[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(9): 834 -837 .
[7] 庄连婷, 黄瑛. 靶向纳米粒超声造影剂的研究进展[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(9): 842 -846 .
[8] 余思, 刘尧, 陈旭. 间充质干细胞外泌体免疫调节作用及其机制的研究进展[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(10): 939 -941,947 .

中国医科大学学报版权所有©2018

未经允许,严禁擅自转载本站图文资料

地址:中国 沈阳市沈北新区蒲河路77号 110122

辽ICP备05014850

JOURNAL OF CHINA MEDICAL UNIVERSITY

ADDRESS: NO.77 PUHE ROAD

SHENYANG NORTH NEW AREA, SHENYANG

LIAONING PROVINCE, P.R. CHINA