微种植体支抗与传统支抗对安氏Ⅱ类错牙合畸形上颌前牙内收的临床效果评价  

Clinical Evaluation of Microimplant Anchorage and Traditional Anchorage in Treatment of ClassⅡMalocclusion with Adduction of Maxillary Anterior Teeth

作　　者：谢琦[1] 陈宇[1] 史克佳 XIE Qi;CHEN Yu;SHI Kejia(Department of Stomatology,Langfang People's Hospital,Langfang 065000,Hebei,China)

机构地区：[1]廊坊市人民医院口腔科,河北廊坊065000

出　　处：《中国美容医学》2022年第6期102-105,共4页Chinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine

基　　金：2019年廊坊市科技支撑计划项目(编号:2019013136)。

摘　　要：目的:比较微种植体支抗与传统支抗辅助两步法滑动关闭间隙对安氏Ⅱ类错牙合畸形上颌前牙内收的临床效果。方法:选取200例安氏Ⅱ类1分类错牙合畸形患者,将其随机分成两组,根据所用支抗类型的不同分为对照组(n=100,微种植体支抗)和治疗组(n=100,横腭杆支抗),并采用两步法滑动关闭间隙,在X线头影测量片中对上颌切牙切缘和第一磨牙的前后位移进行评估。结果:相比于横腭杆支抗(Transpalatal arch,TPA)组,微种植体支抗两步法滑动关闭间隙对上颌前牙的整体内收量和压低量分别增加了4.42 mm和1.53 mm,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。结论:对于中至重度安氏Ⅱ类错牙合畸形患者,微种植体支抗相比于传统支抗在内收上颌前牙的过程中其内收效果更好。Objective Randomized Controlled Trial(RCT)has been designed to compare treatment outcomes between retraction of anterior upper teeth supported by mini-implants and the two-step sliding retraction technique employing conventional anchorage devices.Methods Select 200 patients with ClassⅡmalocclusion and randomly divide them into two groups.According to the different types of anchorage used,they were respectively named with control group(n=100,micro-implant anchorage)and the treatment group(n=100,traditional anchorage),and the two-step sliding retraction technique was used to retraction of anterior upper teeth,the anteroposterior displacement of the incisor margin of the maxillary incisor and the first molar were evaluated in the X-ray cephalometric film.Results Compared with the transpalatal arch(TPA)anchorage group,a bodily retraction and depress of the maxillary anterior teeth in the mini-implants group increased by 4.42 mm and 1.53 mm(P<0.001).Conclusion For patients with moderate to severe Angle ClassⅡmalocclusion,the mini-implant anchorage has a better retraction of anterior upper teeth effect compared to TPA anchorage.

关 键 词：微种植体 横腭杆 支抗 安式Ⅱ类错牙合畸形 上颌前牙内收 

分 类 号：R783.5[医药卫生—口腔医学]