正畸中的第二磨牙难题:粘接还是不粘接?

Fares Alshuraim, Christopher Burns, Darren Morgan, Luay Jabr, Paul Emile Rossouw, Dimitrios Michelogiannakis
{"title":"正畸中的第二磨牙难题:粘接还是不粘接?","authors":"Fares Alshuraim, Christopher Burns, Darren Morgan, Luay Jabr, Paul Emile Rossouw, Dimitrios Michelogiannakis","doi":"10.2319/071223-487.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare orthodontic treatment (OT) outcome in adolescents undergoing nonextraction fixed OT with or without bonding of second molars using the score of the American Board of Orthodontics Cast Radiograph Evaluation (C-R-Eval).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study included healthy adolescents with skeletal Class I or mild Class II/Class III malocclusion, normal or deep overbite (OB), and mild-to-moderate dental crowding (<5 mm) who underwent nonextraction fixed OT with (\"bonded\" group) or without (\"not-bonded\" group) bonding of second molars. Patient treatment records, pre- and posttreatment digital models, lateral cephalograms, and orthopantomograms were assessed. The evaluated outcomes included leveling of the curve of Spee (COS), OB, control of incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA), number of emergency visits (related to poking wires and/or bracket failure of the terminal molar tubes), treatment duration, and C-R-Eval. Treatment variables were compared across time points and among groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sample included 30 patients (mean age 16.07 ± 1.80 years) in the bonded group and 32 patients (mean age 15.69 ± 1.86 years) in the not-bonded group. The mean overall C-R-Eval score was significantly higher (P < .001) in the not-bonded group (25.25 ± 3.98) than in the bonded group (17.70 ± 2.97). There were no significant differences in mean changes of COS, OB, IMPA, or treatment duration among groups. The mean number of emergency visits was significantly higher in the bonded (3.3 ± 0.6) than the not-bonded group (1.9 ± 0.4) (P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bonding of second molars enhances the outcome of nonextraction fixed OT as demonstrated by the C-R-Eval without increasing treatment duration, irrespective of more emergency visits.</p>","PeriodicalId":94224,"journal":{"name":"The Angle orthodontist","volume":" ","pages":"320-327"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11050455/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The second molar dilemma in orthodontics: to bond or not to bond?\",\"authors\":\"Fares Alshuraim, Christopher Burns, Darren Morgan, Luay Jabr, Paul Emile Rossouw, Dimitrios Michelogiannakis\",\"doi\":\"10.2319/071223-487.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare orthodontic treatment (OT) outcome in adolescents undergoing nonextraction fixed OT with or without bonding of second molars using the score of the American Board of Orthodontics Cast Radiograph Evaluation (C-R-Eval).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study included healthy adolescents with skeletal Class I or mild Class II/Class III malocclusion, normal or deep overbite (OB), and mild-to-moderate dental crowding (<5 mm) who underwent nonextraction fixed OT with (\\\"bonded\\\" group) or without (\\\"not-bonded\\\" group) bonding of second molars. Patient treatment records, pre- and posttreatment digital models, lateral cephalograms, and orthopantomograms were assessed. The evaluated outcomes included leveling of the curve of Spee (COS), OB, control of incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA), number of emergency visits (related to poking wires and/or bracket failure of the terminal molar tubes), treatment duration, and C-R-Eval. Treatment variables were compared across time points and among groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sample included 30 patients (mean age 16.07 ± 1.80 years) in the bonded group and 32 patients (mean age 15.69 ± 1.86 years) in the not-bonded group. The mean overall C-R-Eval score was significantly higher (P < .001) in the not-bonded group (25.25 ± 3.98) than in the bonded group (17.70 ± 2.97). There were no significant differences in mean changes of COS, OB, IMPA, or treatment duration among groups. The mean number of emergency visits was significantly higher in the bonded (3.3 ± 0.6) than the not-bonded group (1.9 ± 0.4) (P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bonding of second molars enhances the outcome of nonextraction fixed OT as demonstrated by the C-R-Eval without increasing treatment duration, irrespective of more emergency visits.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Angle orthodontist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"320-327\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11050455/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Angle orthodontist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2319/071223-487.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Angle orthodontist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2319/071223-487.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的采用美国口腔正畸委员会铸型X光片评估(C-R-Eval)的评分标准,比较接受非拔牙固定矫正治疗(OT)并粘接或不粘接第二磨牙的青少年的矫正治疗(OT)效果:研究对象包括骨骼Ⅰ类或轻度Ⅱ类/Ⅲ类错颌畸形、咬合正常或过深(OB)、轻度至中度牙齿拥挤的健康青少年(结果:30 名患者(平均年龄为 24 岁)被纳入研究范围:样本包括粘接组的 30 名患者(平均年龄为 16.07±1.80 岁)和非粘接组的 32 名患者(平均年龄为 15.69±1.86 岁)。未粘接组的 C-R-Eval 平均总分(25.25 ± 3.98)明显高于粘接组(17.70 ± 2.97)(P < .001)。各组的 COS、OB、IMPA 和治疗时间的平均变化无明显差异。粘接组的平均急诊次数(3.3 ± 0.6)明显高于未粘接组(1.9 ± 0.4)(P < .001):结论:第二磨牙粘接可提高非拔牙固定 OT 的疗效,C-R-Eval 证实了这一点,且不会延长治疗时间,也不会增加急诊次数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The second molar dilemma in orthodontics: to bond or not to bond?

Objectives: To compare orthodontic treatment (OT) outcome in adolescents undergoing nonextraction fixed OT with or without bonding of second molars using the score of the American Board of Orthodontics Cast Radiograph Evaluation (C-R-Eval).

Materials and methods: This study included healthy adolescents with skeletal Class I or mild Class II/Class III malocclusion, normal or deep overbite (OB), and mild-to-moderate dental crowding (<5 mm) who underwent nonextraction fixed OT with ("bonded" group) or without ("not-bonded" group) bonding of second molars. Patient treatment records, pre- and posttreatment digital models, lateral cephalograms, and orthopantomograms were assessed. The evaluated outcomes included leveling of the curve of Spee (COS), OB, control of incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA), number of emergency visits (related to poking wires and/or bracket failure of the terminal molar tubes), treatment duration, and C-R-Eval. Treatment variables were compared across time points and among groups.

Results: The sample included 30 patients (mean age 16.07 ± 1.80 years) in the bonded group and 32 patients (mean age 15.69 ± 1.86 years) in the not-bonded group. The mean overall C-R-Eval score was significantly higher (P < .001) in the not-bonded group (25.25 ± 3.98) than in the bonded group (17.70 ± 2.97). There were no significant differences in mean changes of COS, OB, IMPA, or treatment duration among groups. The mean number of emergency visits was significantly higher in the bonded (3.3 ± 0.6) than the not-bonded group (1.9 ± 0.4) (P < .001).

Conclusions: Bonding of second molars enhances the outcome of nonextraction fixed OT as demonstrated by the C-R-Eval without increasing treatment duration, irrespective of more emergency visits.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信