Twin-block与高位头帽肌激动器功能矫治后上切牙区牙槽骨改建的对比研究

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2019.01.008

上海口腔医学 ›› 2019, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (1): 41-47.doi: 10.19439/j.sjos.2019.01.008

Twin-block与高位头帽肌激动器功能矫治后上切牙区牙槽骨改建的对比研究

徐娟, 邱靓星, 任嫒姝, 张林, 杨红梅, 王华桥

重庆医科大学附属口腔医院正畸科,口腔疾病与生物医学重庆市重点实验室,重庆市高校市级口腔生物医学工程重点实验室,重庆 401147

收稿日期:2018-09-17 修回日期:2018-11-16 出版日期:2019-02-25 发布日期:2019-04-12
通讯作者: 王华桥,E-mail：muscle_tina@163.com
作者简介:徐娟（1992-）,女,硕士研究生,E-mail：827916865@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金（81400541）; 中国博士后科学基金（2013M542248）; 重庆市卫生局面上项目(2012-2-131,2015MSXM051); 2016年重庆高校创新团队建设计划资助项目（CXTDG201602006）; 重庆市高校市级口腔生物医学工程重点实验室资助项目

Comparative study of alveolar bone remodeling around the upper incisor area after Twin-block and high-pull headgear-activator functional orthopedic therapy

XU Juan, QIU Liang-xing, REN Ai-shu, ZHANG Lin, YANG Hong-mei, WANG Hua-qiao

Department of Orthodontics, Stomatological Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and Biomedical Sciences, Chongqing Municipal Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Engineering of Higher Education. Chongqing 401147, China

Received:2018-09-17 Revised:2018-11-16 Online:2019-02-25 Published:2019-04-12

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的:探讨生长发育高峰期患者功能矫治后上颌切牙位移及牙槽骨改建情况。方法:选择使用高位头帽肌激动器（HGAC）和Twin-block功能矫治器矫治成功的30例骨性Ⅱ类下颌骨后缩患者为研究对象,根据使用矫治器的不同将其分为HGAC组和Twin-block组,每组15例患者。治疗前及治疗后分别拍摄锥形束CT（CBCT）,观察上颌中切牙在牙槽骨内的相对位置变化及牙槽骨改建情况。采用SPSS 20.0 软件包对治疗前、后唇腭侧牙槽骨厚度、中切牙及牙槽骨角度变化进行分析。结果:在水平方向上,HGAC组和Twin-block组中切牙切缘均发生舌侧移动,而HGAC组根尖发生舌侧移动,Twin-block组根尖发生唇向移动;在垂直方向上,所有患者中切牙切缘均发生向下移动,根尖发生向上移动,但HGAC组切缘垂直方向向下移动较少,根尖垂直方向向上移动较多。HGAC组多数位点牙槽骨厚度增加,而Twin-block组唇侧牙槽骨厚度均减少,腭侧牙槽骨厚度增加。2组牙槽骨总厚度均增加,但Twin-block组牙槽骨总厚度增加更多,HGAC组牙槽骨角度减小更多。结论:2种功能矫治器均可使上切牙区牙槽骨发生积极的生长改建。HGAC在对上切牙实现控制性倾斜内收的同时,可使切牙有一定程度的压入,同时使上切牙区牙槽骨生长角度发生一定变化,而这种变化有利于改善Ⅱ类骨面型。Twin-block可使上切牙倾斜内收,提示在Twin-block功能矫治后行固定正畸内收前牙时,需更加注意前牙转矩的控制。

关键词: 功能矫治, 高位头帽肌激动器, Twin-block, 牙槽骨改建, 锥形束CT

Abstract: PURPOSE: The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate the changes of alveolar bone morphology around the upper incisors before and after functional treatment in adolescents using cone-beam CT(CBCT). METHODS: Thirty patients with skeletal Class II mandibular retrusion who were successfully treated with high-pull headgear-activator(HGAC) and Twin-block were selected and divided into 2 groups (HGAC and Twin-block groups), 15 in each group. CBCT was performed before and after treatment, to observe upper incisor movement in the alveolar bone and alveolar bone remodeling. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.0 software package to analyze the changes of alveolar bone thickness, angle of central incisor and alveolar bone before and after treatment. RESULTS: Horizontally, the edge of the maxillary incisor appeared lingual movement in both groups, while the root apex appeared lingual movement in HGAC group and labial movement in Twin-block group. Vertically, the edge of the maxillary incisor was moved down and the root apex was moved up in all patients, whereas the moving distance was less in the edge and larger in the root apex in HGAC group. The thicknesses of major areas in the alveolar bone significantly increased in HGAC group, while in Twin-block group the labial thickness of the alveolar bone showed significant decrease and the palatal thickness showed significant increase. Moreover, the total thickness of the alveolar bone showed significant increase in both groups, yet Twin-block group showed more increase, and the angle of the alveolar bone showed more decrease in HGAC group. CONCLUSIONS: Both functional appliances can cause positive alveolar bone remodeling in maxillary incisor area. HGAC can achieve a controlled tilt inward movement of the maxillary incisors, intrude the incisors to a certain extent, and allow certain change in the bending angle of the incisor alveolar bone at the same time, which is conducive to improving ClassⅡcraniofacial pattern. Twin-block can tilt the maxillary incisor inward, suggesting that more attention needs to be paid to the control of the torque of the incisor when retracting anterior teeth in fixed orthodontic treatment after Twin-block functional treatment.

Key words: Functional orthopedic, High-pull headgear-activator, Twin-block, Alveolar bone remodeling, Cone-beam CT

中图分类号:

R783.5

徐娟, 邱靓星, 任嫒姝, 张林, 杨红梅, 王华桥. Twin-block与高位头帽肌激动器功能矫治后上切牙区牙槽骨改建的对比研究[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2019, 28(1): 41-47.

XU Juan, QIU Liang-xing, REN Ai-shu, ZHANG Lin, YANG Hong-mei, WANG Hua-qiao. Comparative study of alveolar bone remodeling around the upper incisor area after Twin-block and high-pull headgear-activator functional orthopedic therapy[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2019, 28(1): 41-47.

参考文献

[1] Yagci A, Veli I, Uysal T, et al.Dehiscence and fenestration in skeletal Class Ⅰ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography[J]. Angle Orthod, 2012, 82(1): 67-74.
[2] Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M.Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 2008, 106(1): 106-114.
[3] Moshiri M, Scarfe WC, Hilgers ML, et al.Accuracy of linear measurements from imaging plate and lateral cephalometric images derived from cone beam computed tomography[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2007, 132(4): 550-560.
[4] Gupta A, Kharbanda OP, Balachandran R, et al.Precision of manual landmark identification between as-received and oriented volume-rendered cone-beam computed tomography images[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2017, 151(1): 118-131.
[5] Cevidanes L, Oliveira AE, Motta A, et al.Head orientation in CBCT-generated cephalograms[J]. Angle Orthod, 2009, 79(5): 971-977.
[6] Ahn HW, Moon SC, Baek SH.Morphometric evaluation of changes in the alveolar bone and roots of the maxillary anterior teeth before and after en masse retraction using cone-beam computed tomography[J]. Angle Orthod, 2012, 83(2): 212-221.
[7] Guo QY, Zhang SJ, Liu H, et al.Three-dimensional evaluation of upper anterior alveolar bone dehiscence after incisor retraction and intrusion in adult patients with bimaxillary protrusion malocclusion[J]. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B, 2011, 12(12): 990-997.
[8] 姜若萍, 傅民魁. 正常汉族成年人前牙区牙槽宽度及根尖位置的研究[J].口腔正畸学, 2008, 15(1): 16-19.
[9] Jena AK, Duggal R, Parkash H.Orthopedic and orthodontic effects of twin-block appliance[J]. J Clin Pediatr Dent, 2005, 29(3): 225-230.
[10] Marsan G.Effects of activator and high-pull headgear combination therapy: skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue profile changes[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2007, 29(2): 140-148.
[11] Jena AK, Duggal R, Parkash H.Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of Twin-block and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion: A comparative study[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2006, 130(5): 594-602.
[12] Spalj S, Mroz Tranesen K, Birkeland K, et al.Comparison of activator-headgear and twin block treatment approaches in Class Ⅱ division 1 malocclusion[J]. BioMed Res Int, 2017, 2017: 4861924.
[13] Jacob HB, Buschang PH, Santos-Pinto A.Class Ⅱ malocclusion treatment using high-pull headgear with a splint: a systematic review [J]. Dental Press J Orthod, 2013, 18(2): 21.e1-7.
[14] Gafari J, Shofer FS, Jacobsson-Hunt U, et al.Headgear versus functional regulator in the early treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998, 113(1): 51-61.
[15] 徐亚文. 头帽-肌激动器与Twin-block功能矫治器治疗安氏Ⅱ类下颌后缩的疗效观察[J]. 临床口腔医学杂志, 2013, 29(7): 411-412.
[16] Vardimon AD, Oren E, Ben-Bassat Y.Cortical bone remodeling/tooth movement ratio during maxillary incisor retraction with tip versus torque movements[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998, 114(5): 520-529.
[17] 许天民, 刘妍, 江久汇, 等. 正畸内收上切牙对上颌牙槽骨改建的临床研究[J]. 实用口腔医学杂志, 2004, 20(4): 431-433.
[18] 刘映鸿, 周泽渊, 赵奎, 等. 青少年患者前牙内收过程中牙槽骨改建情况的锥形束CT研究[J].华西口腔医学杂志, 2016, 34(1): 78-84.
[19] 陈香, 张向凤, 黄倩倩, 等. 微种植体支抗辅助内收上切牙后牙槽骨改建的CBCT研究[J].上海口腔医学, 2018, 27(2): 150-155.
[20] 李小兵. 牙弓/牙槽骨弓的塑形矫治—基于牙弓形态发育不良的儿童错畸形诊断与阻断治疗[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2016, 34(6): 556-563.
[21] 赵美英. 正畸与颅面生长发育[C]//陈扬熙. 口腔正畸学—基础、技术与临床[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2012:57.
[22] Andrén A, Naraghi S, Mohlin BO, et al.Pattern and amount of change after orthodontic correction of upper front teeth 7 years postretention[J]. Angle Orthod, 2010, 80(4): 432-437.

Twin-block与高位头帽肌激动器功能矫治后上切牙区牙槽骨改建的对比研究

Comparative study of alveolar bone remodeling around the upper incisor area after Twin-block and high-pull headgear-activator functional orthopedic therapy

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李苏娜, 宋文尚, 刘子略, 杜月茹, 蔡世新. 义齿咬合板联合综合物理疗法对颞下颌关节盘不可复性前移位的疗效评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2024, 33(3): 273-278.
[2]	彭源浩, 庄昕仪, 喻婷, 吕冬梅, 温秀杰, 程钎. 青少年颧牙槽嵴区皮质骨厚度的锥形束CT测量及其与颈椎骨龄的相关性研究[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(6): 623-629.
[3]	王萌, 陶李明, 胡亚男. Twin-block联合上颌扩弓器矫治下颌后缩儿童前后舌位的改变及上气道的三维变化[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(6): 635-639.
[4]	黄仲敏, 张赟, 李小兵. 替牙列早期上颌慢速扩弓对上颌中段牙及牙槽嵴的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(5): 501-507.
[5]	李贵宏, 谢思静, 林梓桐, 张婷, 汤旭娜, 胡勤刚. 下颌第二磨牙C形根管治疗前后根管壁厚度测量分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(4): 395-400.
[6]	马晓晴, 陆雯, 叶茂, 邢允波, 钱文昊, 张玲. 下颌骨后缩伴前牙正常覆盖青少年患者Twin-block治疗效果分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(4): 422-427.
[7]	王文丽, 傅亚婷, 刘华, 马潇. 上颌前牙美学区牙龈三维形态的锥形束CT测量分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(2): 177-182.
[8]	张薇, 陈威, 陈志方. 可调式活动牵引器治疗上颌唇侧倒置阻生中切牙效果评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(2): 193-197.
[9]	宋珏, 刘好好, 刘嘉靓, 陈美华. 上颌磨牙与上颌窦黏膜增厚发生的相关性分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(6): 638-642.
[10]	吕云松, 李朝晖. 颞下颌关节紊乱综合征伴偏侧咀嚼患者锥形束CT特征分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(6): 653-656.
[11]	周子芊, 陈振琦. 上颌窦底对上颌第一磨牙近中移动的影响[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(6): 661-667.
[12]	林翔, 傅裕杰, 任根强, 温佳欢, 陈宇飞, 张旗. U-Net神经网络分割锥形束CT影像中下颌磨牙牙体与牙髓腔及其准确性验证[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(5): 454-459.
[13]	马智菲, 周梦琪, 王丽珍, 承清, 洪瑾. Er:YAG 激光在小型猪牙髓血运重建术中的应用效果评价[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(4): 367-373.
[14]	黄锦程, 赵华强, 李国菊. Stafne骨腔影像学特征：基于CBCT的回顾性分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(4): 439-444.
[15]	林怡君, 鄢洁雅, 王天鸽, 周志捷, 廖盛轩, 毛丽霞, 刘加强. 减数正畸治疗中中切牙牙根及牙槽骨形态变化的锥形束CT测量分析[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2022, 31(2): 211-216.