Altieri Federica, Mezio Martina, Guarnieri Rosanna, Cassetta Michele
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Dent J (Basel). 2022 Sep 27;10(10):179. doi: 10.3390/dj10100179.
The use of traditional intra-oral devices in maxillary molar distalization is not without undesirable consequences. The aim of the present study was to compare the miniscrew-supported distal-jet appliance to a traditional distal-jet appliance by evaluating the amount of upper first molar distalization and the dentoalveolar side effects. Data of 600 subjects visited at the orthodontic unit of Sapienza University of Rom were analyzed. Only 46 patients met the inclusion criteria and were selected and treated. Subjects were assigned randomly to receive treatment either with miniscrew-supported distal-jet appliance (Group A) or with a traditional distal-jet appliance (Group B). In Group A, miniscrews were inserted using a computer-guided surgical guide. The amount of upper first molar distalization and the dentoalveolar side effects were assessed both on the digital casts and on the lateral cephalometric radiograph at the end of the distalization phase. A descriptive statistical analysis that included the mean values and the standard deviation was conducted to evaluate the molar distalization and the dentoalveolar effects in two groups. Intergroup differences were determined using the Student's -test. The significance was set at ≤ 0.05. In Group A, greater maxillary first molar distalization and a spontaneous distalization of the first premolars and a palatal inclination of central incisors were observed. By contrast, in Group B, the first premolars tipped mesially and a proclination of the maxillary central incisors was observed. In both groups, the transverse widths of the dental arch increased while a greater tendency of first premolar extrusion and of maxillary first molar rotation was observed in Group B. The skeletal anchorage device achieved greater first molar distalization and did not cause dento-alveolar side effects.
在上颌磨牙远移中使用传统的口内装置并非没有不良后果。本研究的目的是通过评估上颌第一磨牙远移量和牙牙槽骨副作用,比较微螺钉支持的远移矫治器与传统远移矫治器。对罗马第一大学正畸科就诊的600名受试者的数据进行了分析。只有46例患者符合纳入标准并被选中接受治疗。受试者被随机分配接受微螺钉支持的远移矫治器治疗(A组)或传统远移矫治器治疗(B组)。在A组中,使用计算机引导的手术导板植入微螺钉。在远移阶段结束时,在数字化模型和头颅侧位片上评估上颌第一磨牙远移量和牙牙槽骨副作用。进行了包括平均值和标准差在内的描述性统计分析,以评估两组中的磨牙远移和牙牙槽骨效应。使用Student's t检验确定组间差异。显著性设定为P≤0.05。在A组中,观察到上颌第一磨牙远移量更大,第一前磨牙自发远移,中切牙腭向倾斜。相比之下,在B组中,第一前磨牙近中倾斜,上颌中切牙唇倾。在两组中,牙弓宽度均增加,而B组中第一前磨牙伸长和上颌第一磨牙旋转的趋势更大。骨锚固装置实现了更大的第一磨牙远移,且未引起牙牙槽骨副作用。
J Clin Exp Dent. 2019-7-1
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009-10
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005-9
Int J Comput Dent. 2020
J Clin Exp Dent. 2019-7-1
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017-7
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011-6
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009-10
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007-4
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007-2
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004-1