Ciavarella Domenico, Lorusso Mauro, Fanelli Carlotta, Ferrara Donatella, Esposito Rosa, Laurenziello Michele, Esperouz Fariba, Lo Russo Lucio, Tepedino Michele
Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Dental School of Foggia, University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, Italy.
Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences, Dental School of L'Aquila, University of L'Aquila, 67100 L'Aquila, Italy.
Dent J (Basel). 2024 Aug 13;12(8):254. doi: 10.3390/dj12080254.
(1) Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the Rapid Maxillary Expander (RME) II System compared to a Herbst appliance and a control group in the treatment of class II skeletal malocclusions in growing patients. (2) Methods: A total of 30 class II patients treated using the RME II System (group R) were compared with 30 patients treated with a Herbst appliance (group H) and 30 untreated class II children (group C). Cephalograms were compared at the start (T0) and after 24 months (T1). Nine cephalometric parameters were analyzed: SN-MP, SN-PO, ANB, AR-GO-ME, AR-GO-N, N-GO-ME, SN-PP, LFH, CO-GN, 1+SN, IMPA, OVERJET, and OVERBITE. Since the variables failed the normality test, a Wilcoxon test was performed for a pairwise comparison of the cephalometric measurements taken at T0 (pre-treatment) and at T1 (post-treatment). ANOVA with Tukey post hoc correction was used to evaluate the differences among the groups. (3) Results: ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference for all analyzed variables except for AR-GO-ME, AR-GO-N, and N-GO-ME. Post hoc Tukey's HSD test showed the following difference: the SN-PO angle in group H was 3.59° greater than in group R; the LFH in group H was 4.13 mm greater than in group R. The mandibular length (CO-GN) in group H was 3.94 mm greater than in group R; IMPA in group H was 6.4° greater than in group R; and the ANB angle in group H was 1.47° greater than in group R. (4) Conclusions: The RME II System is an effective therapeutic device for class II skeletal malocclusion treatment in growing patients.
(1) 背景:本研究的目的是评估快速上颌扩弓器(RME)II系统与Herbst矫治器及对照组相比,在治疗生长发育期II类骨性错牙合畸形患者中的疗效。(2) 方法:将总共30例使用RME II系统治疗的II类患者(R组)与30例使用Herbst矫治器治疗的患者(H组)以及30例未经治疗的II类儿童(C组)进行比较。在开始时(T0)和24个月后(T1)对头颅侧位片进行比较。分析了九个头影测量参数:SN-MP、SN-PO、ANB、AR-GO-ME、AR-GO-N、N-GO-ME、SN-PP、LFH、CO-GN、1+SN、IMPA、覆盖、覆牙合。由于变量未通过正态性检验,因此对T0(治疗前)和T1(治疗后)所取的头影测量值进行两两比较时采用Wilcoxon检验。采用方差分析及Tukey事后校正来评估组间差异。(3) 结果:方差分析显示,除AR-GO-ME、AR-GO-N和N-GO-ME外,所有分析变量均存在统计学显著差异。事后Tukey's HSD检验显示出以下差异:H组的SN-PO角比R组大3.59°;H组的LFH比R组大4.13 mm;H组的下颌长度(CO-GN)比R组大3.94 mm;H组的IMPA比R组大6.4°;H组的ANB角比R组大1.47°。(4) 结论:RME II系统是治疗生长发育期II类骨性错牙合畸形的有效治疗装置。