• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

三种不同正畸治疗方法对下颌切牙排列稳定性的影响

Effects of Three Different Orthodontic Treatment Methods on the Stability of Mandibular Incisor Alignment.

作者信息

Gorucu-Coskuner Hande, Atik Ezgi, Kocadereli Ilken

出版信息

J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2017;41(6):486-493. doi: 10.17796/1053-4628-41.6.13.

DOI:10.17796/1053-4628-41.6.13
PMID:29087804
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of extraction, non-extraction and air-rotor stripping treatments on mandibular dental arch dimensions, lower incisor positions and evaluate their effects on the stability of the treatment.

STUDY DESIGN

The sample consisted of 44 patients with Class I malocclusion and moderate crowding including 15 patients treated with extraction, 13 with air-rotor stripping (ARS), and 16 with non-extraction treatment. The records were taken at pretreatment (T0), end of active orthodontic treatment (T1), minimum 3 years post-treatment (T2). The model and cephalometric measurements were evaluated. For statistical analyses ANOVA and Welch test was applied.

RESULTS

At post-retention period Little's irregularity indices were increased to 1.96 mm, 2.38 mm and 3.59 mm for extraction, ARS and non-extraction groups respectively (p<0.05). At T1-T2, intercanine widths were decreased significantly at all groups (p<0.05). The arch length and arch depth decreased significantly at extraction group (p<0.05) from T0 to T1 and remained the same at T2 (p>0.05). The lower incisors were retroclined with treatment and slightly proclined at post-retention period in extraction group. In ARS and non-extraction group, lower incisors proclined with treatment and remained the same at post-retention.

CONCLUSION

At all groups the irregularity indices relapsed but did not return to pretreatment values. Although significant increase at intercanine width was only observed in non-extraction treatment, at post-retention phase, intercanine widths were significantly decreased at all groups. The changes at lower incisor inclinations relapsed slightly in extraction group but remained the same in the other groups.

摘要

目的

比较拔牙、非拔牙和空气涡轮去釉治疗对下颌牙弓尺寸、下切牙位置的影响,并评估它们对治疗稳定性的作用。

研究设计

样本包括44例I类错颌畸形且伴有中度牙列拥挤的患者,其中15例接受拔牙治疗,13例接受空气涡轮去釉(ARS)治疗,16例接受非拔牙治疗。在治疗前(T0)、正畸主动治疗结束时(T1)、治疗后至少3年(T2)进行记录。对模型和头影测量结果进行评估。采用方差分析和韦尔奇检验进行统计学分析。

结果

在保持期后,拔牙组、ARS组和非拔牙组的Little不规则指数分别增加到1.96mm、2.38mm和3.59mm(p<0.05)。在T1-T2阶段,所有组的尖牙间宽度均显著减小(p<0.05)。拔牙组的牙弓长度和牙弓深度从T0到T1显著减小(p<0.05),在T2时保持不变(p>0.05)。拔牙组下切牙在治疗过程中舌倾,在保持期后略有唇倾。在ARS组和非拔牙组中,下切牙在治疗过程中唇倾,在保持期保持不变。

结论

所有组的不规则指数均有复发,但未恢复到治疗前水平。虽然仅在非拔牙治疗中观察到尖牙间宽度有显著增加,但在保持期后,所有组的尖牙间宽度均显著减小。拔牙组下切牙倾斜度的变化略有复发,而其他组保持不变。

相似文献

1
Effects of Three Different Orthodontic Treatment Methods on the Stability of Mandibular Incisor Alignment.三种不同正畸治疗方法对下颌切牙排列稳定性的影响
J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2017;41(6):486-493. doi: 10.17796/1053-4628-41.6.13.
2
Arch-width and perimeter changes in patients with borderline Class I malocclusion treated with extractions or without extractions with air-rotor stripping.采用拔牙或不拔牙配合气动去釉技术治疗安氏Ⅰ类边缘性错[牙合]患者的牙弓宽度和周长变化。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 Jun;137(6):734.e1-7; discussion 734-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.12.023.
3
Relapse of anterior crowding in patients treated with extraction and nonextraction of premolars.拔除和不拔除前磨牙治疗患者的前牙拥挤复发情况。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006 Jun;129(6):775-84. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.02.022.
4
Effects of extraction and nonextraction therapy with air-rotor stripping on facial esthetics in postadolescent borderline patients.空气涡轮刮治术的拔牙与不拔牙治疗对青少年晚期临界病例面部美学的影响
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Apr;133(4):539-49. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.052.
5
Comparison of the outcomes of the lower incisor extraction, premolar extraction and non-extraction treatments.下切牙拔牙、前磨牙拔牙和不拔牙治疗的结果比较。
Eur J Orthod. 2012 Dec;34(6):681-5. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjr064. Epub 2011 Jul 10.
6
Long-term stability of mandibular incisors following successful treatment of Class II, Division 1, malocclusions.II类1分类错牙合成功治疗后下颌切牙的长期稳定性。
Angle Orthod. 1996;66(3):229-38. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1996)066<0229:LTSOMI>2.3.CO;2.
7
Mandibular dental arch changes associated with treatment of crowding using self-ligating and conventional brackets.使用自锁托槽和传统托槽治疗牙列拥挤时下颌牙弓的变化。
Eur J Orthod. 2010 Jun;32(3):248-53. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjp123. Epub 2009 Dec 3.
8
Mandibular incisor alignment and dental arch changes 1 year after extraction of deciduous canines.下颌切牙排列和牙弓变化在乳尖牙拔除 1 年后。
Eur J Orthod. 2012 Oct;34(5):587-94. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjr028. Epub 2011 Feb 23.
9
Long-term stability of Class I premolar extraction treatment.I类前磨牙拔除治疗的长期稳定性。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003 Sep;124(3):277-87. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00448-7.
10
Post-retention crowding and incisor irregularity: a long-term follow-up evaluation of stability and relapse.矫治后牙列拥挤和切牙不齐:稳定性和复发的长期随访评估
Br J Orthod. 1995 Aug;22(3):249-57. doi: 10.1179/bjo.22.3.249.

引用本文的文献

1
Clinical outcomes of interproximal enamel reduction in orthodontic treatment of children and adolescents: a systematic review.儿童和青少年正畸治疗中邻面釉质磨除的临床疗效:一项系统评价
Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2025 Jul 12. doi: 10.1007/s40368-025-01081-y.
2
Comparative Assessment of Relapse Following Fixed Orthodontic Treatment in Patients Treated With and Without Extraction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.固定正畸治疗中拔牙与非拔牙患者复发情况的比较评估:一项系统评价与Meta分析
Cureus. 2025 Mar 3;17(3):e79990. doi: 10.7759/cureus.79990. eCollection 2025 Mar.
3
Extraction vs nonextraction orthodontic treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
拔牙与不拔牙正畸治疗的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Angle Orthod. 2024 Jan 1;94(1):83-106. doi: 10.2319/021123-98.1.
4
Posttreatment stability following therapy using passive self-ligating brackets: extraction vs. nonextraction.使用被动自结扎托槽治疗后的治疗后稳定性:拔牙与不拔牙。
J Orofac Orthop. 2025 May;86(3):1-9. doi: 10.1007/s00056-023-00501-2. Epub 2023 Oct 17.