微型种植体支抗治疗安氏Ⅱ类Ⅰ分类错畸形的临床疗效观察  

Effects of micro-implant on Angle class Ⅱ division Ⅰ malocclusion

作　　者：李静平 徐学军[2] 杨庆福 

机构地区：[1]浙江省永康市第一人民医院口腔科,永康321300 [2]浙江大学医学院附属口腔医院正畸科,杭州310006

出　　处：《口腔医学》2012年第2期88-91,共4页Stomatology

摘　　要：目的观察种植体支抗治疗安氏Ⅱ类Ⅰ分类错畸形的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析48例安氏Ⅱ类Ⅰ分类错患者,分为A、B 2组,每组24例。排齐牙列后,A组于上颌双侧第一磨牙和第二前磨牙牙根之间或第一磨牙和第二磨牙牙根之间植入自攻微型种植体作为支抗,B组常规制作上颌横腭杆加Nance弓。分析2组治疗前后头影和模型测量指标的变化。结果矫治结束后,A组的SNA、ANB、Ls-E、、U1-SN、U1-L1、U1-NA、U1-PP、U6-PP(°)及OJ值的变化较B组明显,2组间差异有统计学意义。结论与传统的上颌横腭杆加Nance弓作为支抗相比,微型种植体支抗能更有效地改善安氏Ⅱ类Ⅰ分类错颌畸形患者的面形凸度及覆、覆盖关系。Objective To explore the clinical effects of micro implant on Angle class Ⅱ divisionⅠmalocclusion.Methods The study was performed on 48 selected adults in use of MBT with micro-implant anchorage（group A,n=24） or with TPA＋Nance anchorage（group B,n=24）.We made cephalometric analysis and model analysis before and after treatment and compared the curative effects between group A and B.Results The curative effects were different between group A and B.Most of the values such as SNA,ANB,Ls-E,U1-SN,U1-L1,U1-NA,U1-PP、U6-PP（°） and OJ displayed more effective results in group A,and all the differences had statistic significance.Conclusions It is better to use MBT with micro-implant anchorage than with TPA＋Nance anchorage in treating Angle class Ⅱ division Ⅰ malocclusion

关 键 词：微型种植体支抗 安氏Ⅱ类Ⅰ分类 NANCE弓 

分 类 号：R783.5[医药卫生—口腔医学]