Wendl B, Stampfl M, Muchitsch A P, Droschl H, Winsauer H, Walter A, Wendl M, Wendl T
Department of Oral Surgery and Orthodontics, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Private Practice, Bregenz, Austria.
J Orofac Orthop. 2017 Jul;78(4):293-299. doi: 10.1007/s00056-017-0083-3.
To investigate the skeletal and dental changes during chincup versus facemask treatment, to compare the long-term effects of the two appliances, and to document the impact of each on treatment success.
In all, 61 patients with Class III syndrome were retrospectively analyzed at three examination times: 7.8 ± 1.7 years of age (T0, pretreatment), 9.6 ± 2.4 years of age (T1, posttreatment), and around 15-20 years later (T2, long-term follow-up).
Significant changes of specific cephalometric parameters for all treatment times: T0-T1 (SNA, interbase and gonial angle, Björk's sum angle, maxillomandibular differential, and distance of upper lip to esthetic line), T1-T2 (NL-NSL, SNB, mandibular-body length, effective mandibular length, and effective maxillary length), and T0-T2 (mandibular-body length, effective mandibular length, effective maxillary length, maxillomandibular differential, SNB, ANB, gonial angle, Björk's sum angle, and Wits appraisal). The T1-T2 results illustrate that in both treatment groups the typical Class III growth pattern often reappeared after treatment, including gains in SNB angle, condylion-gnathion length, and gonion-menton distance.
Either a facemask or a chincup may be effectively used to treat Class III malocclusion. There were differences in long-term stability. Maxillary development was similarly favorable in both groups of patients with successful outcome. The subgroup in whom chincup treatment had failed were mainly characterized by excessive mandibular growth, or lack of maxillary catch-up growth, with deterioration of the maxillomandibular relationship notably in the initial phase of treatment. Early chincup treatment did not have an adverse impact on the temporomandibular joints.
研究颏兜与面罩治疗过程中的骨骼和牙齿变化,比较两种矫治器的长期疗效,并记录每种矫治器对治疗成功的影响。
对61例Ⅲ类综合征患者进行回顾性分析,共三个检查时间点:7.8±1.7岁(T0,治疗前)、9.6±2.4岁(T1,治疗后)以及约15 - 20年后(T2,长期随访)。
所有治疗时间点特定头影测量参数均有显著变化:T0 - T1(SNA、基底线间角、下颌角、比约克总和角、上下颌差异以及上唇至审美平面距离)、T1 - T2(鼻根点至鼻下点连线与鼻根点至软组织鼻下点连线夹角、SNB、下颌体长、有效下颌长度以及有效上颌长度)、T0 - T2(下颌体长、有效下颌长度、有效上颌长度、上下颌差异、SNB、ANB、下颌角、比约克总和角以及Wits值)。T1 - T2结果表明,两个治疗组在治疗后通常都会再次出现典型的Ⅲ类生长模式,包括SNB角增加、髁突 - 下颌角点长度增加以及下颌角点 - 颏前点距离增加。
颏兜或面罩均可有效用于治疗Ⅲ类错 。长期稳定性存在差异。两组治疗成功的患者上颌发育同样良好。颏兜治疗失败的亚组主要表现为下颌过度生长或上颌追赶生长不足,且上下颌关系在治疗初期明显恶化。早期颏兜治疗对颞下颌关节无不良影响。