Gu Min, Savoldi Fabio, Chan Eliza Y L, Tse Christine S K, Lau Michelle T W, Wey Mang C, Hägg Urban, Yang Yanqi
Orthodontics, Division of Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong S.A.R., China.
Orthodontics, Dental School, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2021 Aug;24(3):360-369. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12442. Epub 2020 Nov 30.
The present study compared the treatment changes in the upper airway, hyoid bone position and craniofacial morphology between two groups of children with skeletal class II malocclusion treated with the headgear activator (HGA) and Herbst appliance (Herbst).
Orthodontic population from the Faculty of Dentistry of the University of Hong Kong.
Thirty-four skeletal class II patients treated with the HGA (17 patients, mean age 10.6 ± 1.5 years) and the Herbst (17 patients, mean age 11.0 ± 1.4 years) were matched for sex, age, overjet, skeletal class and mandibular divergence. The patients received lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCRs) at the beginning of treatment (T ), after treatment (T ) and at follow-up (T ). In the HGA group, patients underwent LCRs 7 months before the beginning of treatment (T ), which were used as growth reference for intra-group comparison. Paired Student's t tests were used for intra- and inter-group comparisons (α = .05).
Treatment changes (T -T ) did not differ significantly between the groups. However, at follow-up (T -T ) the Herbst group showed a smaller increase than the HGA group in the vertical position of the hyoid bone relative to the Frankfort plane (P = .013) and mandibular plane (P = .013).
There were no significant differences in the upper airway, hyoid bone position and craniofacial morphology between the groups at the end of treatment. However, the Herbst may provide better long-term control of the vertical position of the hyoid bone than the HGA in children with skeletal class II malocclusion.
本研究比较了两组接受头帽肌激动器(HGA)和Herbst矫治器(Herbst)治疗的骨性II类错牙合儿童在上气道、舌骨位置和颅面形态方面治疗前后的变化。
香港大学牙科学院的正畸患者群体。
34例接受HGA治疗的骨性II类患者(17例,平均年龄10.6±1.5岁)和接受Herbst治疗的患者(17例,平均年龄11.0±1.4岁)在性别、年龄、覆盖、骨性分类和下颌偏斜度方面进行匹配。患者在治疗开始时(T1)、治疗后(T2)和随访时(T3)拍摄头颅侧位片(LCR)。在HGA组,患者在治疗开始前7个月(T0)拍摄LCR,用作组内比较的生长参照。采用配对t检验进行组内和组间比较(α = 0.05)。
两组间治疗变化(T1-T2)无显著差异。然而,在随访时(T2-T3),Herbst组相对于Frankfort平面(P = 0.013)和下颌平面(P = 0.013)舌骨垂直位置的增加小于HGA组。
治疗结束时两组在上气道、舌骨位置和颅面形态方面无显著差异。然而,在骨性II类错牙合儿童中,Herbst矫治器可能比HGA矫治器在舌骨垂直位置的长期控制方面效果更好。