Feu Daniela, de Oliveira Branca Heloísa, Palomares Nathalia Barbosa, Celeste Roger Keller, Miguel José Augusto Mendes
Department of Orthodontics, Vila Velha University, Vila Velha, Espirito Santo, Brazil.
Department of Preventive and Community Dentistry, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017 Jun;151(6):1048-1057. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.10.034.
In this nonrandomized prospective study, we compared the effects of the surgery-first approach with conventional 2-jaw orthognathic surgery on skeletal Class III patients' oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), quality of the orthodontic outcome, and average treatment duration.
The sample consisted of 16 patients with severe skeletal Class III malocclusion, who needed 2-jaw orthognathic surgery: 8 were treated with the surgery-first approach, and 8 were treated with the traditional orthodontic-surgical approach. OHRQoL was assessed by using the Orthognathic Quality of Life Questionnaire (OQLQ) and the Oral Health Impact Profile-short version (OHIP-14). Malocclusion severity and esthetic self-perception were assessed with the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need. Dental health status was determined using the Decayed, Missing and Filled Teeth Index. Tests were repeated at 7 times: baseline, 1 month after appliance placement, and 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after the beginning of the treatment; and for both groups, there was an also evaluation stage after the orthognathic surgery.
After 2 years, the surgery-first group showed a significant decrease in malocclusion severity (P <0.001) and had significant reductions in OQLQ (P <0.001) and OHIP-14 scores (P <0.001). These changes began after the orthognathic surgery and were progressive throughout the evaluation periods. In the traditional orthodontic-surgical approach group, after 2 years of monitoring, all patients were still in the preoperative orthodontic preparation phase, and their malocclusion severity increased significantly, thereby resulting in a not statistically significant worsening of their OHRQoL (OHIP-14, P = 0.89; OQLQ, P = 0.11).
OHRQoL improved significantly in a linear trend of progressive improvements in all severe Class III patients who had the surgery-first approach after the surgical procedure through 2 years of follow-up, as their malocclusion and esthetic self-perception also improved.
在这项非随机前瞻性研究中,我们比较了手术优先方法与传统双颌正颌手术对骨性III类患者口腔健康相关生活质量(OHRQoL)、正畸治疗效果质量及平均治疗持续时间的影响。
样本包括16例需要进行双颌正颌手术的重度骨性III类错牙合患者:8例采用手术优先方法治疗,8例采用传统正畸-手术方法治疗。使用正颌生活质量问卷(OQLQ)和口腔健康影响程度简表(OHIP-14)评估OHRQoL。使用正畸治疗需求指数评估错牙合严重程度和美观自我认知。使用龋失补牙指数确定牙齿健康状况。在7个时间点重复进行测试:基线、矫治器放置后1个月、治疗开始后3个月、6个月、1年和2年;并且两组在正颌手术后均有一个评估阶段。
2年后,手术优先组错牙合严重程度显著降低(P<0.001),OQLQ(P<0.001)和OHIP-14评分显著降低(P<0.001)。这些变化在正颌手术后开始,并在整个评估期内持续进展。在传统正畸-手术方法组中,经过2年的监测,所有患者仍处于术前正畸准备阶段,其错牙合严重程度显著增加,从而导致其OHRQoL无统计学意义的恶化(OHIP-14,P=0.89;OQLQ,P=0.11)。
通过2年的随访,所有采用手术优先方法的重度III类患者在手术后OHRQoL呈线性趋势显著改善,且其错牙合及美观自我认知也得到改善。