期刊文献+

微型种植体支抗与口外弓支抗治疗上牙弓前突的疗效比较分析 预览

Comparison of the curative effect of mini implant implants and oral arch support on the treatment of superior dental arch protrusion
在线阅读 下载PDF
收藏 分享 导出
摘要 目的:探讨微型种植体支抗与口外弓支抗治疗上牙弓前突的疗效。方法:选择2015年1月~2016年2月80例上牙弓前突患者分组。对照组实施口外弓支抗治疗上牙弓前突,微型组则采用微型种植体支抗治疗上牙弓前突。比较两组上牙弓前突矫治效果;矫治之后中切牙压低长度、中切牙内收宽度;干预前后患者UI-SN角、LI-MP角。结果:微型组上牙弓前突矫治效果高于对照组,P〈0.05。观察组显效的患者33例,有效6例,无效1例,总有效39例,总有效率97.50%;对照组显效的患者21例,有效9例,无效10例,总有效30例,总有效率75.00%。干预前两组UI-SN角、LI-MP角相近,微型组81.31±3.15°、98.13±7.11°,对照组81.32±3.16°、98.13±7.16°,P〉0.05;干预后微型组UI-SN角、LI-MP角优于对照组,微型组78.13±2.51°、105.24±8.26°,对照组80.78±2.46°、99.24±7.12°P〈0.05。微型组矫治之后中切牙压低长度、中切牙内收宽度2.65±1.41mm、6.87±1.83mm大于对照组2.12±1.01mm、5.12±1.23mm,P〈0.05。结论:微型种植体支抗与口外弓支抗治疗上牙弓前突的疗效比较,微型种植体支抗效果更好,可更好恢复中切牙压低长度、中切牙内收宽度和头影测量结果,矫治效果良好,值得推广。 Objective: To investigate the curative effect of mini implant implants and oral arch on the treatment of superior dental arch protrusion. Methods: From January 2015 to February 2016, 80 patients with upper arch protrusion were selected. In the control group, the maxillary protraction was performed on the arch of the mouth outside the arch, and the mini-implant was used to treat the maxillary protraction. The effect of correction of maxillary arch protrusion was compared between the two groups. After the correction, the length of incisors was reduced and the width of incision was closed. The UI-SN angle and LI-MP angle of patients before and after intervention were compared. Results: The curative effect of maxillary protraction in mini group was higher than that in control group(P〈0.05). In the observation group, 33 patients were markedly effective, 6 were effective, 1 was ineffective, 39 were effective, and the total effective rate was 97.50%. In the control group, 21 were markedly effective, 9 effective, 10 ineffective and 30 effective. Efficiency 75.00%. The UI-SN angle and LI-MP angle of the two groups before intervention were 81.31±3.15° and 98.13±7.11° in the mini-group and 81.32±3.16° and98.13± 7.16° in the control group, respectively the angle of LI-MP was superior to the control group,mini-group 78.13±2.51°, 105.24±8.26°, control group 80.78±2.46°, 99.24±7.12° P〈0.05. After the mini group orthodontic treatment, the length of the incisors was 2.65±1.41 mm, 6.87±1.83 mm larger than that of the control group(2.12±1.01 mm, 5.12±1.23 mm, P〈0.05). Conclusion: Compared with the treatment of superior arch protrusion by mini-implant support, the effect of mini-implant support is better and the reduction of incisors length, incisors width and head shadow measurement results, correction effect is good, it is worth promoting.
作者 陈文洪 CHEN Wenhong( Department of Stomatology Putian First Hospital, Putian 351100, Fujian Province, China)
出处 《中国口腔种植学杂志》 2018年第1期18-20,36共4页 Chinese Journal of Oral Implantology
关键词 微型种植体支抗 口外弓支抗 上牙弓前突 疗效 比较 micro implant implants estuary arch upper arch protrusion efficacy comparison
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

二级参考文献126

共引文献154

投稿分析

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部 意见反馈