Ishii H, Morita S, Takeuchi Y, Nakamura S
Department of Orthodontics, Higashi-Nippon-Gakuen University, School of Dentistry, Hokkaido, Japan.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987 Oct;92(4):304-12. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(87)90331-3.
The present study was designed to evaluate the true treatment effects of the maxillary protracting appliance with chincap for skeletal Class III cases and to evaluate the difference of true treatment effects between the cases in which the maxilla was protracted from the first molars and the cases protracted from the first premolars. Cephalograms of 63 cases (the first molar protraction group--27 cases protracted from the first molars, the first premolar protraction group--36 cases protracted from the first premolars) treated with the combined maxillary protraction and chincap appliance were used. Template analysis was performed to evaluate the estimated treatment effects without growth change. Forward movement of the maxilla and backward rotation of the mandible were characteristic features of the estimated treatment effects in 63 cases. In comparing the two groups, the maxilla was displaced more anteriorly and rotated more upward and forward in the first molar protraction group. Therefore, the intraoral site of protraction should be selected by considering vertical dimensions of skeletal and dental structures, and the amount of forward displacement of the maxilla required in the treatment of the individual patient.
本研究旨在评估颏兜对上颌前牵引矫治器治疗骨性III类病例的实际治疗效果,并评估上颌从第一磨牙处前牵引与从第一前磨牙处前牵引病例的实际治疗效果差异。使用了63例采用上颌前牵引联合颏兜矫治器治疗的病例的头影测量片(第一磨牙前牵引组——27例从第一磨牙处前牵引,第一前磨牙前牵引组——36例从第一前磨牙处前牵引)。进行模板分析以评估无生长变化时的估计治疗效果。上颌前向移动和下颌向后旋转是63例病例估计治疗效果的特征。在比较两组时,第一磨牙前牵引组上颌向前移位更多,向上和向前旋转更多。因此,应通过考虑骨骼和牙齿结构的垂直维度以及个体患者治疗中所需上颌向前移位的量来选择口内前牵引部位。