Looi L K, Mills J R
Am J Orthod. 1986 Jun;89(6):507-17. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(86)90009-6.
The purpose of this paper was to compare retrospectively the effect on the soft tissues of two contrasting forms of treatment for Class II, Division 1 malocclusion. The first group of 30 persons exhibited uncrowded dentitions and were treated without extractions by means of the Andresen activator. No other appliance was used. The second group was also composed of 30 persons. These subjects were treated with the Begg appliance in its classical form. All of the Begg subjects showed varying amounts of crowding and were treated by extraction of four first premolars. It was believed that the Andresen appliance would maintain the incisors in the most labial position possible, while the Begg group with premolar extractions would involve the maximum lingual incisal movement. These groups were compared with a third group of 22 untreated persons who also exhibited Class II, Division 1 malocclusions. The overjets in the treated groups were successfully reduced in both cases by retraction of the upper incisors; in the Begg group only, retraction of lower incisors was also performed. The upper incisors were retracted substantially more in the Begg group than in the Andresen group, but there was only a slight difference within the two groups in the final position of the upper lip relative to a vertical reference line through sella. There was also a slight difference in the lengths of upper and lower lips within the two treated groups. The lower lip followed the lower incisors more closely in the Begg group. Both upper and lower lips "uncurled" in the treated groups and this probably allowed them to be held together with little strain. There was a wide variation in individual response in all three groups.
本文旨在回顾性比较两种截然不同的治疗方法对安氏II类1分类错牙合患者软组织的影响。第一组30人，牙列无拥挤，采用安德烈森矫治器进行非拔牙治疗，未使用其他矫治器。第二组同样为30人，采用经典形式的Begg矫治器治疗。所有Begg矫治组患者均有不同程度的牙列拥挤，均拔除四颗第一前磨牙进行治疗。据信，安德烈森矫治器能使切牙尽可能保持在最唇向位置，而拔除前磨牙的Begg矫治组则会使切牙最大限度地舌向移动。将这两组与第三组22名未经治疗的安氏II类1分类错牙合患者进行比较。在两个治疗组中，通过内收上前牙，均成功减小了覆盖；仅在Begg矫治组中，还内收下前牙。Begg矫治组上前牙的内收幅度明显大于安德烈森矫治组，但两组上前唇相对于经过蝶鞍的垂直参考线的最终位置仅有轻微差异。两个治疗组的上、下唇长度也有轻微差异。在Begg矫治组中，下唇更贴近下前牙。两个治疗组的上、下唇均“变直”，这可能使它们在几乎没有张力的情况下贴合在一起。三组个体的反应差异很大。
