三种测量方法对下颌平面角判断影响的探究  

Effects of three measurement methods on determining the mandibular plane angle

作　　者：卢云[1] 刘世杰 李佳伦 孔润泽 王林[2] Lu Yun;Liu Shijie;Li Jialun;Kong Runze;Wang Lin(Department of Orthodontics,Collegeof Stomatology,Dalian Medical University,Dalian l16044,China;Department of Orthodontics.Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Nanjing Medical University,Jiangsu ProvinceKey Laboratory of Oral Diseases,Nanjing 210029,Chin;West China of Stomatology,Sichuan University,Chengdu 116091,Chin)

机构地区：[1]大连医科大学口腔医学院正畸教研室,大连116044 [2]南京医科大学附属口腔医院正畸科,江苏省口腔疾病重点实验室,南京210029 [3]四川大学华西口腔医学院正畸科,成都116091

出　　处：《中华口腔正畸学杂志》2022年第4期196-200,共5页Chinese Journal of Orthodontics

基　　金：国家自然科学基金(81801016);辽宁省科技厅(2019-ZD-0627)。

摘　　要：目的探究3种不同定义的下颌平面MP(G)(额顶点Gn与下颌角点Go连线)、MP(T)(下颌下缘最低部的切线)、MP(Me)(过额下点Me与下颌角下缘切线)对下颌平面角测量的影响。方法本研究为回顾性研究,收集我院正畸科初诊患者400例,测量分析头侧位片并进行高、低角筛选,分析影响下颌平面角测量的相关因素。结果①在MP-SN组和MP-FH组中,MP(T)所成下颌平面角与MP(G)、MP(Me)所成下颌平面角差异有统计学意义[MP(G)-SN:37.00°±6.25°,MP(T)-SN:39.44°±7.08°,MP(Me)-SN:37.04°±7.12°;MP(G)-SN vs MP(T)-SN:P<0.001,MP(T)-SN vs MP(Me)-SN:P<0.001;MP(G)-FH:28.21°±5.58°,MP(T)-FH:30.65°±6.35°,MP(Me)-FH:28.25°±6.40°,MP(G)-FH vs MP(T)-FH:P<0.001,MP(T)-FH vs MP(Me)-FH:P<0.001].而MP(G)与MP(Me)所成下颌平面角差异无统计学意义[MP(G)-SN vs MP(Me)-SN:P=0.653;MP(G)-FH vs MP(Me)-FH:P=0.620];MP(G)、MP(T)、MP(Me)平面在MP-SN、MP-FH两组组内及组间筛出高角、低角病例数不一致;③高角组中,MP(G)-FH与额部形态无明显相关性(额厚度/高度:r=-0.090,P=0.381;额角:r=-0.135,P=0.189);低角组中,MP(Me)-FH与额部形态无明显相关性(额厚度:r=-0.258,P=0.194;额角:r=-0.229,P=0.109;额前点高度/额高度:r=-0.318,P=0.100)。结论医师在诊断分析中应注意MP(T)、MP(G)、MP(Me)所构成的下颌平面角存在差异,同组中MP(T)所构成的下颌平面角最大,MP(G)与MP(Me)所构成下颌平面角差异无统计学意义;建议可将MP(G)-FH、MP(Me)-FH分别作为筛选高角、低角病例时测量下颌平面的参考指标。Objective To investigate how the three mandibular plane definitions,which are MP(G),a line connecting the points Gonion to Gnathion,MP(T),a line tangent to the inferior border of the mandible,and MP(Me),a line tangent to the posterior lower border of the mandible and Mention)can affect the measurements of mandibular plane angle.MethodsFour hundred new cases in our hospital were collected and measured.The high and low angles cases were screened,and the factors affecting measurement of mandibular plane were analyzed.Results Significant differences were detected between MP(T)plane and MP(G)plane,or MP(Me)plane in both MP-SN group andMP-FH groupLMP(G)-SN:37.00°±6.25°,MP(T)-SN:39.44°±7.08°,MP(Me)-SN:37.04°±7.12°,MP(G)-SN vs MP(T)-SN:P<0.001,MP(T)-SN vs MP(Me)-SN:P<0.001;MP(G)-FH:28.21°±5.58°,MP(T)-FH:30.65°±6.35,MP(Me)-FH:28.25°±6.40°MP(G)-FH vsMP(T)-FH:P<0.001,MP(T)-FH vs MP(Me)-FH:P<0.001;no statistical difference was found between MP(G)-SN and MP(Me)-SN,P=0.653,and MP(G)-FH and MP(Me)-FH:P=0.620];The numbers of high angle and low angle cases screened by MP(G),MP(T)and MP(Me)were inconsistent both in MP-SN and MP-FH groups and between two groups;③In high angle group,only MP(G)-FH had no correlation with mental morphology(Ratio of chin thickness to Chin height:r=-0.090,P=0.381;Chin angle:r=-0.135,P=0.189);In low angle group,MP(Me)-FH had no correlation with the mental morphology(Chin thickness:r=-0.258.P=0.194;Chin angle:r=-0.229.P=0.109;Ratio of the height of Pogonion height to Chin height:r=-0.318.P=0.100).Conclusions O)rthodontists should pay attention to the difference of mandibular plane angle formed by MP(T),MP(G)and MP(Me)in diagnosis and analysis.The mandibular plane angle by MP(T)is larger than MP(G)and MP(Me)formed,which have no statistical difference.It is suggested that MP(G)-FH could be used as screen reference for the high angle case,and MP(Me)-FH as the reference for the low angle case.

关 键 词：下颌平面 下颌平面角 垂直向 高角 低角 

分 类 号：R783.5[医药卫生—口腔医学]