Department of Orthodontics, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Connecticut Convergence Institute for Translation in Regenerative Engineering, UConn Health, Farmington, CT, USA.
Clin Oral Investig. 2024 Jul 25;28(8):445. doi: 10.1007/s00784-024-05827-8.
This study compared clinical outcomes between aligners and fixed appliances in class II adolescent patients.
Records of 31 aligners and 35 fixed class II patients, aged 13.5 ± 1.6 years were compared. Class II elastics was the mechanism employed for correcting the malocclusion. DI scores were used to compare initial complexity, and the PAR index scores were used to compare the clinical outcomes. Data on demographics, treatment and finishing durations, number of visits and refinements, duration of class II correction, and changes in the IMPA were collected.
The mean pre-, post-treatment, and overall reduction in PAR index scores between the groups were not significantly different (P > 0.05). The clear aligners group had significantly shorter treatment duration (20.0 ± 11.6 months) than the fixed group (27.4 ± 9.1 months) (P < 0.001). The number of visits for the aligners' group was significantly less (12.7 ± 6.2) than in the fixed group (17.8 ± 5.8) (P < 0.001). Duration for class II correction was significantly shorter for clear aligners (13.3 ± 10.0 months) compared to the fixed group (17.4 ± 9.0 months) (P = 0.026). A smaller post-treatment change in IMPA (2 ± 6°) was detected in the aligners group compared to the fixed group (5 ± 6°) (P < 0.05).
Treatment outcomes for aligners in class II adolescent patients were comparable to those achieved in fixed appliances. Shorter treatment and class II correction durations, fewer visits, and better control for the IMPA were noticed in the aligners' group.
Treating class II adolescent patients with aligners seems promising and demands shorter treatment time and fewer visits.
本研究比较了青少年 II 类错颌患者使用隐形矫治器和固定矫治器的临床效果。
比较了 31 例隐形矫治和 35 例固定 II 类错颌患者的资料,患者年龄为 13.5±1.6 岁。采用 II 类牵引橡皮圈作为矫治机制。DI 评分用于比较初始错颌严重程度,PAR 指数评分用于比较临床效果。收集了人口统计学资料、治疗和结束时间、就诊次数和调整次数、II 类错颌矫治时间、IMPA 变化等数据。
两组间 PAR 指数评分的治疗前、治疗后和总体降低值无显著差异(P>0.05)。隐形矫治组的治疗时间明显短于固定组(20.0±11.6 个月 vs. 27.4±9.1 个月)(P<0.001)。隐形矫治组的就诊次数明显少于固定组(12.7±6.2 次 vs. 17.8±5.8 次)(P<0.001)。隐形矫治组的 II 类错颌矫治时间明显短于固定组(13.3±10.0 个月 vs. 17.4±9.0 个月)(P=0.026)。隐形矫治组治疗后 IMPA 的变化较小(2±6°),而固定组的变化较大(5±6°)(P<0.05)。
青少年 II 类错颌患者使用隐形矫治器的治疗效果与固定矫治器相当。隐形矫治组的治疗和 II 类错颌矫治时间更短,就诊次数更少,IMPA 控制更好。
使用隐形矫治器治疗青少年 II 类错颌具有良好的应用前景,可缩短治疗时间,减少就诊次数。