[1] 陈绪道. 微种植体支抗推磨牙远中移动的临床研究[J].中国美容医学,2021,(10):157-160.
　 CHEN Xu-dao. Clinical Study on Micro-Implant Anchorage for Molar Distalization[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2021,(10):157-160.
点击复制

 微种植体支抗推磨牙远中移动的临床研究
()
分享到：

《中国美容医学》[ISSN:1008-6445/CN:61-1347/R]

卷:
期数:
2021年10期
页码:
157-160
栏目:
出版日期:
2021-10-10

文章信息/Info

Title:
 Clinical Study on Micro-Implant Anchorage for Molar Distalization
文章编号:
1008-6455(2021)10-0157-04
作者:
 陈绪道
Author(s):
 CHEN Xu-dao
关键词:
 [关键词]安氏Ⅱ类错牙合畸形; 微种植体支抗; 磨牙远移; 咬合功能
Keywords:
 Key words: Angle ClassⅡ malocclusion;  micro-implant anchorage;  molar distalization;  occlusal function
分类号:
R783.5
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
[摘要]目的：探究微种植体支抗推磨牙远中移动矫治安氏Ⅱ类错牙合畸形的临床疗效。方法：回顾性分析2016年1月-2018年12月
于笔者医院接受传统口外弓支抗治疗（对照组，n=60）及接受微种植体支抗治疗（研究组，n=60）的安氏Ⅱ类的错牙合畸形患者
的临床资料。对比两组矫治时间，计算两组牙冠、牙根远移值[上颌第一磨牙牙冠平均远中移动值(UM1E-Y)、上颌第二磨牙牙
冠平均远中移动值(UM2E-Y)、第一磨牙牙根平均远移值(UM1A-Y)、第一磨牙牙根平均远移值(UM2A-Y)]，比较两组治疗前后的
其他牙齿相关指标[上颌第一磨牙近中颊尖点至Y轴的距离（U6-Y）、上颌第一磨牙牙根尖点至Y轴的距离（U6a-Y）、上颌中
切牙长轴与SN平面夹角（U1-SN）]、硬组织指标[上齿、下齿槽座角（SNA、SNB）、上下齿槽座角（ANB）、牙合平面与SN平面
夹角（OP-SN）]、软组织相关指标[上唇突度、下唇突度、鼻唇角（NLA）、上唇突距（Ls-E）]及咀嚼功能（咬合力、咀嚼效
率）的差异。 结果：研究组平均矫治时间显著短于对照组（P ＜0.05），UM1E-Y、UM2E-Y值显著高于对照组（P ＜0.05）。治
疗后，两组U6-Y、U6a-Y较治疗前均显著降低，且研究组上述指标均显著低于对照组（P ＜0.05），研究组治疗前后U1-SN无
明显变化（P＞0.05），而对照组较治疗前显著降低（P ＜0.05），两组治疗后U1-SN对比差异显著（P＜0.05）；治疗后，两组
SNA、SNB、ANB与治疗前比较无差异（P ＞0.05），而OP-SN较治疗前上升（P ＜0.05）；两组间治疗后SNA、SNB、ANB对比无显著
差异（P ＞0.05），而研究组OP-SN显著低于对照组（P ＜0.05）；治疗后，两组上唇突度，下唇突度、Ls-E较治疗前显著降低
而NLA显著上升（P ＜0.05），且研究组患者上述指标显著优于对照组（P ＜0.05）。治疗后，两组咬合力、咀嚼效率较治疗前
均显著上升（P＜0.05），且研究组咀嚼功能指标显著优于对照组（P ＜0.05）。结论：应用微种植体支抗矫治安氏Ⅱ类错牙合畸
形患者，可缩短矫治时间，有效推磨牙向远中移动，提升患者咀嚼功能，具有较好的临床应用价值。

Abstract:
Abstract:Objective To explore the clinical efficacy of micro-implant anchorage for molar distalization in correcting Angle
Class Ⅱmalocclusion. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on clinical data of patients with Angle Class Ⅱ
malocclusion who received traditional headgear anchorage treatment (control group, n =60) or received micro-implant anchorage
treatment (study group, n =60)in our hospital from January 2016 to December 2018. The correction time was combined between
the two groups, and the crown and root distalization values [average distalization value of maxillary first molar crown (UM1E-Y),
average distalization value of maxillary second molar crown (UM2E-Y), average distalization value of first molar root
(UM1A-Y), average distalization value of second molar root (UM2A-Y)] were calculated in the two groups. The tooth-related
indicators [the distance from maxillary first molar mesiobuccal tip to Y axis (U6-Y), the distance from maxillary first molar
root apex tip to Y axis (U6a-Y), angle between the long axis of maxillary central incisor and the SN plane (U1-SN)], hard tissue
indicators [sella-nasion-A point, sella-nasion-B point (SNA, SNB), A point-nasion-B point (ANB), occlusal plane-SN plane
angle (OP-SN)], soft tissue-related indicators [upper lip protrusion (Ls-SnPg), lower lip protrusion (Li-SnPg), nasolabial angle
(NLA), upper lip protrusion distance (Ls-E)] and masticatory function (occlusal force, masticatory efficiency) before and after
treatment were compared between the two groups. Results The average correction time in study group was significantly shorter
than that in control group (P ＜0.05), and UM1E-Y and UM2E-Y were significantly higher than those in control group (P ＜0.05).
After treatment, U6-Y and U6a-Y in the two groups were significantly decreased compared with those before treatment, and
the above indicators in study group were significantly lower than those in control group (P ＜0.05), and there was no significant
change in U1-SN in study group before and after treatment (P ＞0.05), and U1-SN in control group was significantly lower
than that before treatment (P ＜0.05), and there was a significant difference in U1-SN between the two groups after treatment
(P ＜0.05). After treatment, there were no differences in SNA, SNB and ANB in the two groups compared with those before
treatment (P ＞0.05), and OP-SN was higher than that before treatment (P ＜0.05). There were no differences in SNA, SNB and
ANB between the two groups after treatment (P ＞0.05), and OP-SN in study group was significantly lower than that in control
group (P ＜0.05). After treatment, the Ls-SnPg, Li-SnPg and Ls-E of the two groups were significantly decreased compared
with those before treatment while NLA was increased significantly (P ＜0.05), and the above indicators in study group were
significantly better than those in control group (P ＜0.05). After treatment, the occlusal force and masticatory efficiency in the
two groups were significantly increased compared with those before treatment (P ＜0.05), and the masticatory function indexes
in study group were significantly better than those in control group (P ＜0.05). Conclusion Micro-implant anchorage for
patients with Angle Class Ⅱ malocclusion can shorten the correction time, effectively push the molar distalization, and improve
the masticatory function, with good clinical application value.

相似文献/References:

[1]封颖丽,任亚男,高锦瑜,等. 无托槽隐形联合固定矫治成人骨性Ⅲ类错牙合一例[J].中国美容医学,2018,(11):75.
　FENG Ying-li,REN Ya-nan,GAO Jin-yu,et al. Treatment for Adult Skeletal Class Ⅲ Malocclusion Combined Invisible Aligner and Fixed Appliance[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2018,(10):75.
[2] 高玉丽,郝学丽. 微种植体支抗治疗对正畸患者牙周状况及美观程度的影响[J].中国美容医学,2021,(9):132.
　GAO Yu-li,HAO Xue-li. Effects of Micro-screw Implant Anchorage on Root Resorption Status, ChewingFunction and Aesthetic Degree of Patients with Orthodontics[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2021,(10):132.
[3]李世彦,鲁晓红,梁建晖.两种正畸矫治器联合微种植体支抗对先天性缺牙患者美观及咬合功能恢复的比较[J].中国美容医学,2022,(2):138.
　LI Shiyan,LU Xiaohong,LIANG Jianhui.Comparison of Two Orthodontic Appliances Combined with Micro-implant Anchorage in the Recovery of Aesthetics and Occlusal Function in Patients with Congenital Missing Teeth[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2022,(10):138.
[4]张依鸣 综述,张 勤 审校.微种植体支抗压低上前牙的研究进展[J].中国美容医学,2022,(3):185.
　ZHANG Yiming,ZHANG Qin.Research Progress of Mini-implant Anchorage in the Maxillary Anterior Teeth Intrusion[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2022,(10):185.
[5]吴绍旋,赵云霞,沈家安,等.微种植体支抗在口腔正畸应用中的临床效果研究[J].中国美容医学,2022,(4):137.
　WU Shaoxuan,ZHAO Yunxia,SHEN Jiaan,et al.Study on the Application of Microscrew Implant Anchorage and External Arch Reinforcement Anchorage in Orthodontic Treatment[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2022,(10):137.
[6]徐卫华,臧 悦,王洪伟.微种植体支抗与口外弓支抗在口腔正畸治疗中的疗效对比研究[J].中国美容医学,2022,(5):126.
　XU Weihua,ZANG Yue,WANG Hongwei.Comparative Study of Micro-implant Anchorage and External Arch Anchorage in Orthodontic Treatment[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2022,(10):126.
[7]郑雅心,何 洁,张俊杰,等.微种植体支抗整体远移上牙列对上气道影响的三维分析[J].中国美容医学,2022,(8):125.
　ZHENG Yaxin,HE Jie,ZHANG Junjie,et al.Three-dimensional Analysis of Upper Airway before and after the Maxillary Dentition Distalization with Microimplant[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2022,(10):125.
[8]李月明.微种植体支抗联合MBT矫治技术在青少年骨性Ⅱ类1分类患者中的应用[J].中国美容医学,2022,(12):160.
　LI Yueming.Application Value of Screw Implant Anchorage Combined with MBT Correction Technique on Adolescent Skeletal Class Division 1 Cases[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2022,(10):160.
[9]童 琳,高 蕾,吴松松,等.腭侧与颊侧微种植体支抗远移上颌磨牙的临床疗效及对侧貌美学效果的影响研究[J].中国美容医学,2023,(1):145.
　TONG lin,GAO Lei,WU Songsong,et al.Effect of the Clinical Effect and Aesthetics of Lateral Appearance on Palatal and Buccal Implantation of Microimplant Anchorage of Maxillary Molars[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2023,(10):145.
[10]谢 琦,陈 宇,史克佳.微种植体支抗不同植入部位推上颌磨牙远移的稳定性及对软组织侧貌美学的影响[J].中国美容医学,2023,(2):127.
　XIE Qi,CHEN Yu,SHI Kejia.The Stability of Microimplant Anchorage with Different Implant-positions in Pushing Maxillary Molars Displacement and Its Effect on Soft Tissue Profi le Aesthetics[J].Medical Aesthetics and Beauty,2023,(10):127.

更新日期/Last Update: 2021-11-04