摘要
目的比较头帽口外力装置和钛合金钉种植体作为正畸强支抗对正畸病人治疗结果的影响。方法选择开唇露齿,牙列拥挤和/或前牙前突的患者20名,随机分成两组。第一组使用头帽口外弓加强后牙支抗;第二组使用助攻型种植钉作为支抗体。比较两组总的治疗时间,及治疗前后X线头影测量的线距和U1-SN的角度差值。结果①种植体周围组织健康,没有发生松动和脱落。②使用口外支抗组总的治疗时间平均为23.9月,种植支抗组平均为20.9月。③使用口外支抗组的支抗磨牙近中平均2.91mm,切牙切缘平均内收5.07mm,治疗前后U1-SN角度的差值为15.7°;而使用种植支抗组的支抗磨牙近中移动平均1.05mm,切牙切缘平均内收6.69mm,U1-SN角度的差值为12.1°,两组之间的差异有统计学意义。结论使用钛合金钉种植体作为正畸强支抗要比头帽口外力装置能够更好的控制牙齿移动,缩短整个治疗的时间。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of using implant and extra-force as anchorage. Methods Twenty orthodontic patients were selected and randomly divided into two groups. The patients had the same clinical manifestations as anterior teeth, maxillary or bimaxillary protrusion, and needed first premolar extraction and maximum anchorage. The total treatment time and the measurement of some of the landmarks were compared between the two groups, and the data was analyzed by t-test. Results The tissues around the implant were healthy, and no implant was loose. The average total treatment time was 23.9 months in the extra-force group, and 20. 9 months in the implant group. The edge of the upper incisors was retracted by 5.07 mm in extra-force group, and 6. 69 mm in implant group; the first molar moved 2.91 mm anteriorly in extra-force group, and 1.05 mm in implant group; the value difference of U1-SN was 15.7°in extra- force group, and 12.1°in implant group, before and after treatment, which were significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion Compared with the extra-force, implant was more efficient as anchorage for the control of teeth movement, with which the treatment time could be shortened.
出处
《北京口腔医学》
CAS
2007年第4期213-215,共3页
Beijing Journal of Stomatology
关键词
正畸
种植体
支抗
牙齿移动
Orthodontics
Implant
Anchorage
Tooth movement
