Knösel Michael, Klang Elisabeth, Helms Hans-Joachim, Wiechmann Dirk
*Department of Orthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Germany, **Department of Orthodontics, Universidad de La Frontera (UFRO), Temuco, Chile,
***Private Practice, Bad Essen.
Eur J Orthod. 2016 Oct;38(5):485-92. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjv069. Epub 2015 Sep 29.
Using lingual enamel surfaces for bracket placement not only has esthetic advantages, but may also be suitable in terms of reducing frequencies of enamel decalcifications.
To test the null-hypothesis that there is no significant difference in enamel decalcification or cavitation incidence adjacent to and beneath bracket bases between two lingual multi-bracket (MB) appliances that are different in terms of design, material composition, and manufacturing technology (group A: WIN, DW-LingualSystems; group B: Incognito, 3M-Unitek), taking into account patient- and treatment-related variables on white spot lesion (WSL) formation.
Standardized, digital, top-view photographs of 630 consecutive subjects (16214 teeth; n Incognito = 237/6076 teeth; n WIN = 393/10138 teeth; mean age: 17.47±7.8; m/f 43.2/56.8%) with completed lingual MB treatment of the upper and lower permanent teeth 1-7 were screened for decalcification or cavitation adjacent to and beneath the bracket bases before and after treatment, scored from 0 to 7. Non-parametric ANOVA was used for main effects 'appliance type', 'gender', 'treatment complexity', 'grouped age' (≤16/>16 years), and 'treatment duration' as covariable, at an α-level of 5%.
About 2.57% [5.94%] of all teeth in group A [B] developed decalcifications. Subject-related incidence was 9.59% [16.17%] for upper incisors in group A [B], and 12.98% [25.74%] for all teeth 16-46. There were significant effects by gender, age, and treatment duration.
The null-hypothesis was rejected: sub-bracket lesions were significantly less frequent in group A, while frequencies of WSL adjacent to brackets were not significantly affected by appliance type. In view of the overall low incidences of lingual post-orthodontic white-spot lesions, the use of lingual appliances is advocated as a valid strategy for a reduction of enamel decalcifications during orthodontic treatment.
使用舌侧牙釉质表面进行托槽安置不仅具有美观优势,而且在降低牙釉质脱矿频率方面可能也是合适的。
检验零假设,即在设计、材料成分和制造技术方面存在差异的两种舌侧多托槽矫治器(A组:WIN,DW-LingualSystems;B组:Incognito,3M-Unitek)之间,托槽基底部及下方的牙釉质脱矿或龋损发生率不存在显著差异,同时考虑与患者及治疗相关的影响白斑病变(WSL)形成的变量。
对630例连续受试者(16214颗牙齿;Incognito组 = 237例/6076颗牙齿;WIN组 = 393例/10138颗牙齿;平均年龄:17.47±7.8岁;男/女比例为43.2/56.8%)完成上下颌1 - 7恒牙舌侧多托槽矫治后,在治疗前后对托槽基底部及下方的脱矿或龋损情况进行标准化数字顶视图拍照,并从0至7进行评分。以5%的α水平,将“矫治器类型”“性别”“治疗复杂性”“分组年龄”(≤16岁/>16岁)和“治疗持续时间”作为协变量,采用非参数方差分析其主要效应。
A组[B组]中约2.57%[5.94%]的牙齿出现脱矿。A组[B组]上前牙与患者相关的发生率为9.59%[16.17%],所有16 - 46号牙齿的发生率为12.98%[25.74%]。性别、年龄和治疗持续时间有显著影响。
零假设被拒绝:A组托槽下病变的发生率显著更低,而托槽附近白斑病变的发生率未受矫治器类型的显著影响。鉴于舌侧正畸后白斑病变的总体发生率较低,提倡使用舌侧矫治器作为正畸治疗期间减少牙釉质脱矿的有效策略。