不同矫治技术对口腔正畸青少年患者龈沟液内炎性因子水平的影响比较  

Comparison of the effects of different orthodontic techniques on the levels of inflammatory factors in gingival crevicular fluid of orthodontic adolescents

作　　者：刘逢佳[1] 区跃坚[1] 张玲[1] 李宛男 Liu Fengjia;Ou Yuejian;Zhang Ling;Li Wannan(Department of Stomatology,Huzhou Central Hospital,Affiliated Center Hospital of Huzhou University,Huzhou 313000,Zhejiang Province,China)

机构地区：[1]湖州市中心医院,湖州师范学院附属中心医院口腔科,湖州313000

出　　处：《中国基层医药》2022年第12期1822-1827,共6页Chinese Journal of Primary Medicine and Pharmacy

基　　金：浙江省湖州市公益性应用研究项目(2020GYB11)。

摘　　要：目的比较无托槽隐形矫治技术与传统固定矫治技术对口腔正畸青少年患者龈沟液内炎性因子水平的影响。方法选取2020年6-9月在湖州市中心医院初次就诊的口腔正畸患者67例为研究对象,采用随机对照研究方法,按照随机数字表法分为观察组34例,对照组33例。对照组采取传统固定矫治,观察组则采取无托槽隐形矫治。在治疗时及治疗后1、2、4、6个月后,对两组患者炎性因子和牙周指数做出比较与分析。结果治疗时和治疗后1个月,观察组龈沟液白细胞介素1β(IL-1β)、白细胞介素6(IL-6)、肿瘤坏死因子α(TNF-α)与对照组比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);治疗后2、4、6个月时,观察组各项指标均显著低于对照组(IL-1β:t_(2个月)=5.56,P=0.042;t_(4个月)=8.14,P=0.019;t_(6个月)=9.87,P=0.002。IL-6:t_(2个月)=7.15,P=0.029;t_(4个月)=7.94,P=0.021;t_(6个月)=9.16,P=0.007。TNF-α:t_(2个月)=6.87,P=0.039;t_(4个月)=7.65,P=0.026:t_(6个月)=9.89,P=0.001);两组患者牙周GI、SBI、PD以及PLI接受治疗后明显上升,组间比较,治疗开始及第1个月,两组牙龈指数(GI)、龈沟出血指数(SBI)、探诊深度(PD)、菌斑指数(PLI)比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);治疗第2、4、6个月时,观察组GI、SBI、PD以及PLI指标均显著低于对照组(GI:t_(2个月)=3.62,P=0.073;t_(4个月)=8.16,P=0.018;t_(6个月)=8.54,P=0.016。SBI:t_(2个月)=5.65,P=0.042;t_(4个月)=7.56,P=0.027;t_(6个月)=8.15,P=0.019。PD:t_(2个月)=5.652,P=0.042;t_(4个月)=7.56,P=0.027,t_(6个月)=8.15,P=0.019。PLI:t_(2个月)=9.57,P=0.006;t_(4个月)=9.98,P=0.002,t_(6个月)=9.94,P=0.010)。此外,在治疗第1个月时观察组PLI显著低于对照组(t=9.99,P=0.001)。结论在口腔正畸治疗中,无托槽隐形矫治技术相对于传统固定矫治技术更容易维护牙周组织健康,对牙周健康影响较小。Objective To investigate the effects of bracket-free invisible orthodontic technique versus traditional fixed orthodontic technique on the levels of inflammatory factors in the gingival crevicular fluid of orthodontic adolescents.Methods A total of 67 orthodontic patients who received their first orthodontic treatment in Huzhou Central Hospital from June to September 2020 were included in this study.They were randomly divided into an observation group(n=34)and a control group(n=33).The control group was treated with traditional fixed orthodontic treatment.The observation group was treated with invisible orthodontic treatment without brackets.At 0,1,2,4,and 6 months of treatment,the level of inflammatory factors and periodontal index were compared.Results At 0 and 1 month of treatment,there were no significant differences in the levels of interleukin-1β(IL-1β),interleukin-6(IL-6),and tumor necrosis factor-α(TNF-α)in the gingival crevicular fluid between the observation and control groups(all P>0.05).At 2,4,and 6 months of treatment,the levels of IL-1β,IL-6,and TNF-αin the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group(IL-1β:t_(2 months)=5.56,P=0.042;t_(4 months)=8.14,P=0.019;t_(6 months)=9.87,P=0.002.IL-6:t_(2 months)=7.15,P=0.029;t_(4 months)=7.94,P=0.021;t_(6 months)=9.16,P=0.007.TNF-α:t_(2 months)=6.87,P=0.039;t_(4 months)=7.65,P=0.026:t_(6 months)=9.89,P=0.001).In each group,gingival index(GI),sulcus bleeding index(SBI),probing depth(PD),and plaque index(PLI)increased significantly after treatment.At 0 and 1 month of treatment,there were no significant differences in GI,SBI,PD,and PLI between the two groups(all P>0.05).At 2,4,and 6 months of treatment,GI,SBI,PD,and PLI in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group(GI:t_(2 months)=3.62,P=0.073;t_(4 months)=8.16,P=0.018;t_(6 months)=8.54,P=0.016.SBI:t_(2 months)=5.65,P=0.042;t_(4 months)=7.56,P=0.027;t_(6 months)=8.15,P=0.019.PD:t_(2 months)=5.652,P=0.042;t_(4 months)=7.56,P=0.027,t_(6 month

关 键 词：正畸学 矫正 正畸矫正器 可摘式 正畸托架 牙龈缝液 牙周指数 白细胞介素6 白细胞介素1β 肿瘤坏死因子α 

分 类 号：R783.5[医药卫生—口腔医学]