• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparative Analysis of Braces and Aligners: Long-Term Orthodontic Outcomes.牙套与隐形矫治器的对比分析:长期正畸效果
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Jul;16(Suppl 3):S2385-S2387. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_268_24. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
2
Long-term Outcomes of Traditional Braces versus Invisalign in Orthodontic Treatment.传统牙套与隐适美正畸治疗的长期效果
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Jul;16(Suppl 3):S2446-S2448. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_265_24. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
3
Outcome assessment of Invisalign and traditional orthodontic treatment compared with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system.与美国正畸委员会客观分级系统相比,隐适美和传统正畸治疗的疗效评估
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005 Sep;128(3):292-8; discussion 298. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.06.002.
4
What percentage of patients switch from Invisalign to braces? A retrospective study evaluating the conversion rate, number of refinement scans, and length of treatment.有多少患者从隐适美(Invisalign)转用到传统牙套(braces)?一项回顾性研究评估转化率、精细调整扫描次数和治疗时长。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2023 Apr;163(4):526-530. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.03.016. Epub 2022 Dec 18.
5
Braces versus Invisalign®: gingival parameters and patients' satisfaction during treatment: a cross-sectional study.braces与隐适美®对比:治疗期间的牙龈参数及患者满意度:一项横断面研究
BMC Oral Health. 2015 Jun 24;15:69. doi: 10.1186/s12903-015-0060-4.
6
Twitter analysis of the orthodontic patient experience with braces vs Invisalign.关于佩戴传统牙套与隐适美正畸患者体验的推特分析。
Angle Orthod. 2017 May;87(3):377-383. doi: 10.2319/062816-508.1. Epub 2017 Jan 6.
7
Effectiveness of Invisalign Treatment on Open Bite Correction.隐适美矫治器治疗开颌畸形的疗效
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Feb;16(Suppl 1):S850-S852. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1058_23. Epub 2024 Feb 29.
8
Interceptive Treatment with Invisalign First in Moderate and Severe Cases: A Case Series.Invisalign First在中重度病例中的早期干预治疗:病例系列
Children (Basel). 2022 Aug 5;9(8):1176. doi: 10.3390/children9081176.
9
Differences in finished case quality between Invisalign and traditional fixed appliances.隐适美和传统固定矫治器的最终病例质量差异。
Angle Orthod. 2022 Mar 1;92(2):173-179. doi: 10.2319/032921-246.1.
10
Are clear aligners as effective as conventional fixed appliances?透明矫治器与传统固定矫治器的效果一样吗?
Evid Based Dent. 2020 Mar;21(1):30-31. doi: 10.1038/s41432-020-0079-5.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison of Mechanical Behavior of Clear Aligner and Rapid Palatal Expander on Transverse Plane: An In Vitro Study.透明矫治器与快速腭开展器在横平面上的力学行为比较:一项体外研究
Bioengineering (Basel). 2024 Jan 23;11(2):103. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering11020103.
2
Orthodontic Treatment with Clear Aligners and The Scientific Reality Behind Their Marketing: A Literature Review.隐形矫治器正畸治疗及其营销背后的科学真相:文献综述
Turk J Orthod. 2019 Dec 1;32(4):241-246. doi: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2019.18083. eCollection 2019 Dec.
3
Clear aligners in orthodontic treatment.正畸治疗中的透明矫治器。
Aust Dent J. 2017 Mar;62 Suppl 1:58-62. doi: 10.1111/adj.12480.
4
Efficacy of clear aligners in controlling orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic review.透明矫治器在控制正畸牙齿移动中的疗效:一项系统评价。
Angle Orthod. 2015 Sep;85(5):881-9. doi: 10.2319/061614-436.1. Epub 2014 Nov 20.
5
How well does Invisalign work? A prospective clinical study evaluating the efficacy of tooth movement with Invisalign.隐适美矫治效果如何?一项评估隐适美牙齿移动疗效的前瞻性临床研究。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Jan;135(1):27-35. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.018.
6
2008 JCO study of orthodontic diagnosis and treatment procedures, part 1: results and trends.2008年《临床肿瘤学杂志》正畸诊断与治疗程序研究,第1部分:结果与趋势
J Clin Orthod. 2008 Nov;42(11):625-40.
7
Smile attractiveness. Self-perception and influence on personality.微笑吸引力。自我认知及其对个性的影响。
Angle Orthod. 2007 Sep;77(5):759-65. doi: 10.2319/082606-349.
8
Orthodontic retention: a systematic review.正畸保持:一项系统评价
J Orthod. 2006 Sep;33(3):205-12. doi: 10.1179/146531205225021624.
9
The six keys to normal occlusion.正常咬合的六个关键因素。
Am J Orthod. 1972 Sep;62(3):296-309. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9416(72)90268-0.

牙套与隐形矫治器的对比分析:长期正畸效果

Comparative Analysis of Braces and Aligners: Long-Term Orthodontic Outcomes.

作者信息

Aref Sayyad, Ravuri Preetham, Kubavat Ajay K, Sowmya Cherukupalli, Nallamilli Leela Venkata Soujanya, Bhanawat Nilesh, Tiwari Rahul

机构信息

Consultant Orthodontist and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Nanded, Maharashtra, India.

Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat, India.

出版信息

J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Jul;16(Suppl 3):S2385-S2387. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_268_24. Epub 2024 Jul 31.

DOI:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_268_24
PMID:39346382
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11426652/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the long-term results of orthodontic treatment with traditional braces and Invisalign, with a particular emphasis on treatment length, patient satisfaction, correction of malocclusion, and long-term stability.

METHODS

Between 2020 and 2022, individuals who had orthodontic treatment at a tertiary care center had their data analysed. Patients with mild to severe malocclusions treated with conventional braces or Invisalign between the ages of 12 and 18 met the inclusion criteria. Assessments were done on results, length of treatment, degree of malocclusion, and long-term stability. With significance set at < 0.05, statistical analyses comprised t-tests for treatment duration and Chi-square testing for malocclusion correction.

FINDINGS

The mean treatment time for Invisalign was much shorter (18 months) than for conventional braces (24 months) ( < 0.001). With 88-90% success rates, both techniques demonstrated remarkable success rates in malocclusion treatment. Even though Invisalign was associated with a somewhat greater percentage of relapse instances, the difference was not statistically significant ( > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Invisalign showed a much shorter treatment period than conventional braces, yet both showed excellent malocclusion correction. The choice of modality should be based on patient satisfaction, treatment objectives, and case complexity, taking into account the trade-offs between treatment length and potential variations in long-term stability.

摘要

目的

本回顾性研究的目的是评估传统牙套和隐适美正畸治疗的长期效果,特别关注治疗时长、患者满意度、错颌畸形的矫正以及长期稳定性。

方法

2020年至2022年间,对在一家三级医疗中心接受正畸治疗的个体的数据进行了分析。年龄在12至18岁之间、使用传统牙套或隐适美治疗轻至重度错颌畸形的患者符合纳入标准。对治疗结果、治疗时长、错颌畸形程度和长期稳定性进行了评估。显著性水平设定为<0.05,统计分析包括治疗持续时间的t检验和错颌畸形矫正的卡方检验。

结果

隐适美的平均治疗时间(18个月)比传统牙套(24个月)短得多(<0.001)。两种技术在错颌畸形治疗中的成功率均达到88%-90%,效果显著。尽管隐适美出现复发情况的比例略高,但差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。

结论

总之,隐适美的治疗周期比传统牙套短得多,但两者在矫正错颌畸形方面都表现出色。治疗方式的选择应基于患者满意度、治疗目标和病例复杂性,同时考虑治疗时长和长期稳定性潜在差异之间的权衡。