• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Orthodontic treatment efficiency with self-ligating and conventional edgewise twin brackets: a prospective randomized clinical trial.自锁托槽和传统方丝弓双尖牙托槽矫治技术的效率比较:一项前瞻性随机临床试验。
Angle Orthod. 2012 Sep;82(5):929-34. doi: 10.2319/101911-653.1. Epub 2012 Mar 7.
2
Time efficiency of self-ligating vs conventional brackets in orthodontics: effect of appliances and ligating systems.正畸治疗中自锁托槽与传统托槽的时间效率:矫治器和结扎系统的影响
Prog Orthod. 2008;9(2):74-80.
3
Comparison of mandibular arch changes during alignment and leveling with 2 preadjusted edgewise appliances.使用两种预成直丝弓矫治器排齐整平阶段下颌牙弓变化的比较
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Sep;136(3):340-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.030.
4
Root resorption, treatment time and extraction rate during orthodontic treatment with self-ligating and conventional brackets.正畸治疗中自锁托槽和传统托槽的牙根吸收、治疗时间和拔牙率。
Head Face Med. 2014 Jan 23;10:2. doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-10-2.
5
Comparison of the efficacy of tooth alignment among lingual and labial brackets: an in vitro study.舌侧托槽与唇侧托槽牙齿排齐效果的比较:一项体外研究。
Eur J Orthod. 2018 Nov 30;40(6):660-665. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjy005.
6
Efficiency of self-ligating vs conventionally ligated brackets during initial alignment.自锁托槽与传统结扎托槽在初始排齐阶段的效率比较。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 Aug;138(2):138.e1-7; discussion 138-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.03.020.
7
Comparison of transverse maxillary dental arch width changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets in patients requiring premolar extraction - A randomised clinical trial.需要拔除前磨牙的患者使用自锁托槽和传统托槽时上颌牙弓宽度变化的比较——一项随机临床试验。
Int Orthod. 2019 Dec;17(4):687-692. doi: 10.1016/j.ortho.2019.08.006. Epub 2019 Aug 26.
8
Comparison of active self-ligating brackets and conventional pre-adjusted brackets.主动自结扎托槽与传统预成矫治器的比较。
Aust Orthod J. 2008 Nov;24(2):102-9.
9
Efficiency of compensatory orthodontic treatment of mild Class III malocclusion with two different bracket systems.两种不同托槽系统对轻度III类错牙合进行代偿性正畸治疗的疗效
Dental Press J Orthod. 2017 Nov-Dec;22(6):49-55. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.22.6.049-055.oar.
10
Treatment time, outcome, and anchorage loss comparisons of self-ligating and conventional brackets.自锁托槽和传统托槽的治疗时间、疗效和支抗丢失比较。
Angle Orthod. 2013 Mar;83(2):280-5. doi: 10.2319/041912-326.1. Epub 2012 Aug 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Incisors' bone height and inclination changes after orthodontic treatment with a self-ligating passive system.使用自结扎被动系统进行正畸治疗后切牙的牙槽骨高度和倾斜度变化
J Clin Exp Dent. 2023 Aug 1;15(8):e635-e640. doi: 10.4317/jced.60669. eCollection 2023 Aug.
2
Root resorption in relation to a modified piezocision technique.与改良压电切开技术相关的牙根吸收
Angle Orthod. 2022 May 1;92(3):347-352. doi: 10.2319/121520-1009.1.
3
Reducing Friction in Orthodontic Brackets: A Matter of Material or Type of Ligation Selection? In-Vitro Comparative Study.减少正畸托槽中的摩擦力:材料问题还是结扎选择类型问题?体外比较研究。
Materials (Basel). 2022 Apr 3;15(7):2640. doi: 10.3390/ma15072640.
4
The Influence of Friction on Design of the Type of Bracket and Its Relation to OHRQoL in Patients Who Use Multi-Bracket Appliances: A Randomized Clinical Trial.摩擦力对多托槽矫治器患者托槽类型设计的影响及其与口腔健康相关生活质量的关系:一项随机临床试验
Medicina (Kaunas). 2021 Feb 17;57(2):171. doi: 10.3390/medicina57020171.
5
Effects of High Frequency Acceleration Device on Aligner Treatment-A Pilot Study.高频加速装置对隐形矫治治疗的影响——一项初步研究
Dent J (Basel). 2018 Jul 12;6(3):32. doi: 10.3390/dj6030032.
6
Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents.儿童和青少年上前牙突出(安氏II类错牙合)的正畸治疗。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Mar 13;3(3):CD003452. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003452.pub4.
7
Transversal changes, space closure, and efficiency of conventional and self-ligating appliances : A quantitative systematic review.横向变化、间隙关闭以及传统矫治器和自锁矫治器的效率:一项定量系统评价
J Orofac Orthop. 2018 Jan;79(1):1-10. doi: 10.1007/s00056-017-0110-4. Epub 2017 Nov 3.
8
Why do some orthodontic treatments last so long while others do not?为什么有些正畸治疗持续时间很长,而有些则不然?
Dental Press J Orthod. 2017 Mar-Apr;22(2):9-10. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.22.2.009-010.edt.
9
Comparative evaluation of efficacy of self-ligating interactive bracket with conventional preadjusted bracket: A clinical study.自结扎交互托槽与传统预成矫治器疗效的比较评价:一项临床研究。
Contemp Clin Dent. 2016 Apr-Jun;7(2):158-62. doi: 10.4103/0976-237X.183049.
10
An interview with Greg J. Huang.对格雷格·J·黄的一次采访。
Dental Press J Orthod. 2015 Nov-Dec;20(6):32-6. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.20.6.032-036.int.

本文引用的文献

1
Duration of treatment and occlusal outcome using Damon3 self-ligated and conventional orthodontic bracket systems in extraction patients: a prospective randomized clinical trial.使用 Damon3 自锁式和传统正畸托槽系统治疗拔牙患者的疗程和咬合结果:一项前瞻性随机临床试验。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Feb;139(2):e111-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.020.
2
Randomized clinical trial of orthodontic treatment efficiency with self-ligating and conventional fixed orthodontic appliances.自锁托槽和传统固定矫治器正畸治疗效率的随机临床试验。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 Jun;137(6):738-42. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.023.
3
Active or passive self-ligating brackets? A randomized controlled trial of comparative efficiency in resolving maxillary anterior crowding in adolescents.主动式或被动式自锁托槽?比较青少年上颌前牙拥挤矫治效率的随机对照试验。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 Jan;137(1):12.e1-6; discussion 12-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.08.019.
4
Self-ligating brackets in orthodontics. A systematic review.正畸自锁托槽:系统评价。
Angle Orthod. 2010 May;80(3):575-84. doi: 10.2319/081009-454.1.
5
Frictional resistance in self-ligating orthodontic brackets and conventionally ligated brackets. A systematic review.自锁正畸托槽与传统结扎托槽的摩擦阻力。一项系统评价。
Angle Orthod. 2009 May;79(3):592-601. doi: 10.2319/060208-288.1.
6
Efficiency of mandibular arch alignment with 2 preadjusted edgewise appliances.使用两种预调整方丝弓矫治器进行下颌牙弓排齐的效率
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 May;135(5):597-602. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.06.014.
7
Self-ligating brackets in orthodontics: Do they deliver what they claim?
Aust Dent J. 2009 Mar;54(1):9-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2008.01081.x.
8
2008 JCO study of orthodontic diagnosis and treatment procedures, part 1: results and trends.2008年《临床肿瘤学杂志》正畸诊断与治疗程序研究,第1部分:结果与趋势
J Clin Orthod. 2008 Nov;42(11):625-40.
9
Conventionally ligated versus self-ligating metal brackets--a comparative study.传统结扎与自结扎金属托槽——一项对比研究。
Eur J Orthod. 2008 Dec;30(6):654-60. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjn053. Epub 2008 Nov 21.
10
Alignment efficiency of Damon3 self-ligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems: a randomized clinical trial.Damon3自结扎与传统正畸托槽系统的排齐效率:一项随机临床试验。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Oct;134(4):470.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.04.018.

自锁托槽和传统方丝弓双尖牙托槽矫治技术的效率比较:一项前瞻性随机临床试验。

Orthodontic treatment efficiency with self-ligating and conventional edgewise twin brackets: a prospective randomized clinical trial.

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Östersund hospital, Östersund, Sweden.

出版信息

Angle Orthod. 2012 Sep;82(5):929-34. doi: 10.2319/101911-653.1. Epub 2012 Mar 7.

DOI:10.2319/101911-653.1
PMID:22397386
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8823125/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a prospective and randomized study of the efficiency of orthodontic treatment with self-ligating edgewise brackets (SL; Time2 brand, American Orthodontics) and conventional edgewise twin brackets (CE; Gemini brand, 3M).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred consecutive patients were randomized to treatment with either SL or CE brackets. The participants were treated by one of three specialists in orthodontics and with continuous instructions alternately by five orthodontic assistants according to our normal treatment routine (ie, modified 0.022" MBT preadjusted edgewise technique). The treatments were evaluated in terms of overall treatment time, number of visits, and treatment outcome using the Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need (ICON). The number of emergency appointments, number of archwires, overjet, relative space, and extractions at treatment start were noted.

RESULTS

After dropouts, the analyzed material consisted of 44 patients treated with SL (mean age 15.3 years, mean ICON 60.7, 70.4% female) and 46 patients treated with CE (mean age 15.0 years, mean ICON 56.5, 71.7% female). There were no statistically significant differences between the SL and CE groups in terms of mean treatment time in months (20.4 vs 18.2), mean number of visits (15.5 vs 14.1), mean ICON scores after treatment (13.2 vs 11.9), or mean ICON improvement grade (7.9 vs 9.1).

CONCLUSION

Orthodontic treatment with SL brackets does not reduce treatment time or number of appointments and does not affect posttreatment ICON scores or ICON improvement grade compared with CE brackets.

摘要

目的

对自锁托槽矫治技术(SL;Time2 品牌,美国 Orthodontics)与传统方丝弓托槽矫治技术(CE;Gemini 品牌,3M)的疗效进行前瞻性、随机研究。

材料与方法

连续 100 例患者被随机分为 SL 组或 CE 组。所有患者均由三位正畸专家进行治疗,同时按照我们的常规治疗方案(即改良 0.022"MBT 预成方丝弓技术)由五名正畸助手交替给予连续指导。采用复杂性、结局和需要指数(ICON)评估总体治疗时间、就诊次数和治疗结局。记录急诊就诊次数、弓丝数量、覆、牙弓间隙和治疗初始拔牙情况。

结果

剔除失访者后,共纳入 44 例 SL 组(平均年龄 15.3 岁,ICON 平均 60.7,女性占 70.4%)和 46 例 CE 组(平均年龄 15.0 岁,ICON 平均 56.5,女性占 71.7%)患者。SL 组和 CE 组的平均治疗时间(20.4 个月比 18.2 个月)、平均就诊次数(15.5 次比 14.1 次)、治疗后 ICON 评分(13.2 分比 11.9 分)和 ICON 改善等级(7.9 分比 9.1 分)差异均无统计学意义。

结论

与 CE 托槽相比,自锁托槽矫治技术并未缩短治疗时间或减少就诊次数,也未影响治疗后 ICON 评分或 ICON 改善等级。