Farronato Giampietro, Giannini Lucia, Galbiati Guido, Grillo Elena, Maspero Cinzia
Department of Orthodontics, Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda - Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, University of Milan, Milan 20122, Italy.
Prog Orthod. 2013 May 20;14(1):4. doi: 10.1186/2196-1042-14-4.
The aim of the present study was to assess the muscular variations at the electromyography (EMG) level for the anterior temporalis muscles and masseter muscles during treatment with Occlus-o-Guide® and Andresen activator appliances.
Eighty-two patients (35 males and 47 females) aged between 8 and 12 years (mean age, 10.5±0.8 years) participated in the study. Fifty patients underwent treatment with an Occlus-o-Guide® and 32 patients with an Andresen activator. All patients underwent EMG examination using a Freely EMG (De Gotzen, Legnano, Italy) and surface bipolar electrodes when the appliances were worn for the first time (T0), and after 6 months (T1) and after 12 months (T2) of appliance use.
Statistical analysis showed that both at T0 and T2, the percent overlapping coefficient (POC) of the anterior temporalis muscles was not statistically different between the appliance groups. At T0, the POC of the masseter muscles was significantly lower for the Andresen appliance as compared to the Occlus-o-Guide® (p=0.02), while at T2 this significance was lost.
At insertion of an appliance, all patients show neuromuscular balance that does not correspond to orthognathic occlusion. Both appliances work by creating muscular imbalance. With the appliances in situ, EMG responses were generally analogous for the Occlus-o-Guide® and the Andresen activator; however, the imbalance was greater and the recovery of the orthological muscular balance was slower in patients under treatment with the Andresen activator as compared to those with the Occlus-o-Guide®.
本研究的目的是评估在使用Occlus-o-Guide®矫治器和安氏矫治器治疗期间,颞肌前束和咬肌在肌电图(EMG)水平上的肌肉变化。
82例年龄在8至12岁之间(平均年龄10.5±0.8岁)的患者(35例男性和47例女性)参与了本研究。50例患者使用Occlus-o-Guide®矫治器进行治疗,32例患者使用安氏矫治器。所有患者在首次佩戴矫治器时(T0)、佩戴6个月后(T1)和佩戴12个月后(T2),使用Freely EMG(意大利莱尼亚诺的De Gotzen公司生产)和表面双极电极进行肌电图检查。
统计分析表明,在T0和T2时,矫治器组之间颞肌前束的重叠百分比系数(POC)无统计学差异。在T0时,与Occlus-o-Guide®矫治器相比,安氏矫治器咬肌的POC显著更低(p = 0.02),而在T2时这种差异消失。
在佩戴矫治器时,所有患者均表现出与正颌咬合不相符的神经肌肉平衡。两种矫治器均通过造成肌肉失衡起作用。矫治器在位时,Occlus-o-Guide®矫治器和安氏矫治器的肌电图反应总体相似;然而,与使用Occlus-o-Guide®矫治器的患者相比,使用安氏矫治器治疗的患者肌肉失衡更大,且正常肌肉平衡的恢复更慢。