Suppr超能文献

基于颅底的头影测量重叠法:四种方法的综述与比较

Cephalometric superimposition on the cranial base: a review and a comparison of four methods.

作者信息

Ghafari J, Engel F E, Laster L L

出版信息

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987 May;91(5):403-13. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(87)90393-3.

Abstract

Spatial change in the jaws of growing persons is often evaluated by superimposing cephalometric tracings made at different points in time. Methods of superimposition vary according to structures used as references within the skull. This study compares four different superimposition methods. The sample consisted of 26 patients (13 boys, 13 girls) treated for Class II, Division 1 malocclusions with extraction of the four first premolars. Tracings of pretreatment (average age for boys, 12.5 years; for girls, 12.2 years) and posttreatment (average age for boys, 15.4 years; for girls, 14.9 years) cephalograms were superimposed according to the following methods: (1) best fit of anterior cranial base anatomy, (2) superimposition on SN line, registered at S, (3) superimposition on registration point R with Bolton-nasion planes parallel, and (4) superimposition on basion-nasion (Ricketts), registered at point CC (4) and point N (4a). Differences in amount of change among the superimposition methods were assessed independently for each of the following landmarks: PNS, ANS, A, B, Pog, Gon. On each patient and for each landmark, ten distances--the paired differences of five posttreatment positions obtained by methods 1, 2, 3, 4, and 4a--were evaluated. Two methods were compared at a time. A t test examined the average difference for each comparison. Because all differences between all paired methods were significant (P less than 0.01), t tests were then viewed under the hypothesis that a difference less than or equal to 1 mm was insignificant clinically. Clinically-statistically significant differences were found only for boys and for the total sample between methods 4a and each of methods 1, 2, and 3. As method 4a is advocated to assess changes of point A (Ricketts), this method gives, for the same person, an interpretation of anterior maxillary change in position different from the other methods. Conclusions about facial changes may be made only in reference to the superimposition method.

摘要

生长发育期人群颌骨的空间变化通常通过叠加不同时间点拍摄的头影测量描图来评估。叠加方法根据颅骨内用作参考的结构而有所不同。本研究比较了四种不同的叠加方法。样本包括26例接受治疗的安氏II类1分类错牙合患者(13名男孩,13名女孩),均拔除了四颗第一前磨牙。根据以下方法叠加治疗前(男孩平均年龄12.5岁,女孩平均年龄12.2岁)和治疗后(男孩平均年龄15.4岁,女孩平均年龄14.9岁)的头影测量图:(1)前颅底解剖结构的最佳拟合;(2)叠加在SN线上,以S点为基准;(3)叠加在定位点R上,使Bolton-鼻根平面平行;(4)叠加在颅底-鼻根(Ricketts)线上,以CC点(4)和N点(4a)为基准。对于以下每个标志点:前鼻棘(PNS)、鼻棘(ANS)、A点、B点、颏前点(Pog)、下颌角点(Gon),独立评估叠加方法之间的变化量差异。对于每位患者和每个标志点,评估了十个距离——通过方法1、2、3、4和4a获得的五个治疗后位置的配对差异。每次比较两种方法。采用t检验来检验每次比较的平均差异。由于所有配对方法之间的差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.01),因此在假设差异小于或等于1mm在临床上无意义的前提下进行t检验。仅在男孩以及整个样本中发现方法4a与方法1、2和3中的每一种之间存在临床统计学显著差异。由于提倡使用方法4a来评估A点(Ricketts)的变化,对于同一个人,该方法对头上颌前部位置变化的解释与其他方法不同。关于面部变化的结论只能参考叠加方法得出。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验