Somoskövi István, Herényi Gejza, Szabó Gyula Tamás, Gurdán Zsuzsanna, Szabó Gyula
Pécs Tudományegyetem Egészségtudományi és Orvostudományi Centrum Altalános Orvostudományi Kar Fogászati és Szájsebészeti Klinika, Pécs.
Fogorv Sz. 2008 Dec;101(6):225-30.
In certain orthodontic treatments therapy includes the removal of permanent tooth or teeth. The number of objective studies on assessing extraction frequency is low and values in the international publications range between wide limits. This shows that often the extraction decision in the treatment planning does is not made upon the criteria of evidence-based dentistry. In our practice, a retrospective analysis of treatment plans prepared between the 1st of January 2004 and the 31st of December 2006 (416 cases) has been performed. The overall prevalence of treatments with extraction was 41.59% for all patients, the rate was 51.63% in patients with permanent dentition at the time of the planning. The highest proportion of extraction (49.71%) was found in Class II subdivision 2 cases, and the lowest percentage (30.17%) in Class I cases. The decision for extraction does not seem to be influenced by cephalometric analysis directly. The higher percentage of extraction found in permanent dentition period shows that when we cannot use interceptive treatment alternatives, we are forced to extract tooth more frequently. On the other hand, the lower value in early mixed dentition period can be explained by the relatively higher number of treatments with the aim to avoid extraction.
在某些正畸治疗中，治疗方法包括拔除一颗或多颗恒牙。评估拔牙频率的客观研究数量较少，国际出版物中的数据范围差异很大。这表明，在治疗计划中，拔牙决策往往并非基于循证牙科的标准做出。在我们的实践中，对2004年1月1日至2006年12月31日期间制定的治疗计划进行了回顾性分析（共416例）。所有患者中拔牙治疗的总体患病率为41.59%，计划时恒牙列患者的拔牙率为51.63%。拔牙比例最高的是Ⅱ类2分类病例（49.71%），最低的是Ⅰ类病例（30.17%）。拔牙决策似乎并未直接受到头影测量分析的影响。恒牙列期拔牙比例较高表明，当我们无法采用预防性治疗方案时，就不得不更频繁地拔牙。另一方面，混合牙列早期拔牙比例较低，可以解释为旨在避免拔牙的治疗数量相对较多。
