Li Yibo, Alifu Alimire, Peng Yiran
Department of Pediatric Dentistry, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, 610041 Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, 610041 Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2024 Nov;48(6):133-143. doi: 10.22514/jocpd.2024.133. Epub 2024 Nov 3.
To investigate the optimal timing of maxillary protraction in children with Class III malocclusion to aid comprehension of this still non-consensual topic. In all, the data of 97 children with Class III malocclusion treated by using the Delaire facemask with maxillary expansion were collected retrospectively and divided into three groups according to their dentition stages; those subjects in the mixed dentition group were further divided into three subgroups. All patients were regrouped by the cervical vertebral maturation index (CVMI) and observed closely by cephalograms at the beginning of treatment (T0) and after facemask removal (T1). Comparisons between subgroups, within groups, and the final evaluation of the increment of maxillary length were performed by different statistical methods. Similar favorable maxillary traction effects were achieved in all stages. Intragroup comparisons showed changes without significance in aspect ratio during the mixed dentition stage, while there was a significant decrease during the deciduous and permanent dentition stages. The largest increment of maxillary length was obtained when the maxillary protraction began at Cervical Stage (CS)2. However, no significant difference was found in all skeletal measurements among the three groups (deciduous, mixed and permanent dentition stages) and the three subgroups with mixed dentition. The univariable linear regression analysis also showed that CVMI and dentition stage at T1 did not have a significant impact on the increment of maxillary length. In our center, Class III malocclusion patients treated with the Delaire facemask achieved similar skeletal changes in short term, when they began the treatment at different dentition stages or CVMI stages. Starting the maxillary protraction at CS2 was likely a reliable choice for those who desired more maxillary advancement.
为了探讨替牙晚期Ⅲ类错患者行上颌前方牵引的最佳时机,以便更好地理解这一尚未达成共识的问题。本研究回顾性分析了 97 例应用 Delair 面具行上颌扩弓治疗的Ⅲ类错患者的资料,根据其牙龄阶段将患者分为 3 组,混合牙列组进一步分为 3 个亚组。所有患者均根据颈椎成熟度指标(CVMl)重新分组,并在治疗开始时(T0)和面具去除后(T1)通过头颅侧位片进行密切观察。通过不同的统计学方法比较了亚组间、组内和上颌长度增加的最终评价。所有阶段均获得了相似的上颌良好牵引效果。组内比较显示,在混合牙列期,面高比无显著变化,而在乳恒牙列期则显著下降。当上颌骨牵引开始于颈椎 2 期(CS2)时,上颌骨的增加量最大。然而,在乳恒牙列期和混合牙列的 3 个亚组中,3 个组间的所有骨骼测量值均无显著差异。单变量线性回归分析也表明,T1 时的 CVMl 和牙龄阶段对上颌骨长度的增加没有显著影响。在本中心,应用 Delair 面具治疗的Ⅲ类错患者在不同牙龄阶段或 CVMl 阶段开始治疗时,短期内获得了相似的骨骼变化。CS2 开始上颌骨牵引可能是那些希望获得更多上颌骨前突的患者的可靠选择。