上颌骨重叠法：三种用于生长及治疗变化的头影测量评估方法的比较
Maxillary superimposition: a comparison of three methods for cephalometric evaluation of growth and treatment change.
作者信息
Nielsen I L
机构信息
Department of Growth and Development, School of Dentistry, University of California, San Francisco.
出版信息
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989 May;95(5):422-31. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90304-1.
Two anatomic methods are statistically compared with the implant method for superimposing serial head films in 18 subjects with metallic implants. Findings showed that the "best fit" method--that is, superimposition along the palatal plane registered at ANS--traditionally used by orthodontists, significantly underestimates the eruption of the teeth by 30% to 50%. The "structural method," which is based on the use of stable structures in the maxilla, showed no significant differences in vertical displacement of selected landmarks in comparison with the implant method.
对18名有金属植入物的受试者，将两种解剖学方法与植入物法进行统计学比较，以叠加系列头颅片。结果显示，正畸医生传统使用的“最佳拟合”方法，即沿前鼻棘处记录的腭平面进行叠加，显著低估了牙齿萌出量的30%至50%。基于上颌稳定结构使用的“结构法”，与植入物法相比，所选标志点的垂直位移无显著差异。
Zotero 插件