摘要
目的 :比较下颌前伸矫治器 (MandibularProtractionAppliance ,MPA)和Herbst矫治器对AngleⅡ类错牙合的治疗效果。方法 :选择 2 6例AngleⅡ类错牙合病人 ,男 14例 ,女 12例 ,最大 13岁 ,最小 10岁。X线头影测量显示主要为下颌后缩及轻微上颌前突 ,手腕片显示为生长发育高峰期。将这些病人分成两组 ,一组用下颌前伸矫治器治疗 (MPA组 ) ,另一组用Herbst矫治器进行治疗 (HA组 )。功能矫治结束时 ,两组病例均摄X线头颅定位侧位片 ,由专人定点、测量 ,并进行统计学分析。结果 :X线头影测量结果显示两组病例中Co -Pg、Go -Pg及Co -Go均增大 ,其变化量经统计学检验差异无显著性意义 ,表明下颌前伸矫治器及Herbst矫治器均能促进下颌骨生长 ,尤其是下颌升支的生长 ;SNB、ANB、U1-L1、U1-NL及L1-MP的变化量经过统计学检验差异有显著性意义 ,说明下颌前伸矫治器和Herbst矫治器都能有效矫治AngleⅡ类错牙合颌骨矢状关系不调 ,尤其是前者更有效 ,而Herbst矫治器易引起支抗丢失 ,即易使上颌前牙舌向倾斜、下颌前牙唇倾。结论 :下颌前伸矫治器和Herbst矫治器治疗早期AngleⅡ类错牙合均可取得明显的骨胳改变 。
Objective:To investigate the effectiveness of the mandibular protraction apliance and herbst apliance in the treatment of Angle Ⅱ malocclusion.Methods:Twenty-six Angle Ⅱ patients(aged 10-13 years,male 14,female 12) with mandible retrusion and slight maxillary protrusion were included. Radiographs of the left hand and wrist showed the patients were at pubertal stage.All the patients were divided into two groups, one was MPA group, another was HA group.Results:The cephalometrics results showed Co-Pg, Go-Pg and Co-Go increased .which showed no difference by statistical analysis.The mandibular protraction apliance and Herbst apliance improved the growth of mandible.The varies of SNB, ANB, U1-L1, U1-NL and L1-MP showed sygnificant difference by statistical analysis.Which showed the mandibular protraction apliance treated Angle Ⅱ malocclusion more effectively than Herbst apliance.Conclusions:The more obvious skeletal change can be achieved with the mandibular protraction apliance treatment in early Angle Ⅱ malocclusion than Herbst apliance.
出处
《口腔医学研究》
CAS
CSCD
2003年第6期510-511,共2页
Journal of Oral Science Research
