{"title":"使用透明矫治器进行上颌牙弓远端矫治时,微型螺钉锚固与 II 类弹性矫治器的比较。","authors":"Fen Liu, Jian Liu, Mengying Guo, Zhihua Li, Guang Shu, Fanfan Dai","doi":"10.2319/110723-743.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To identify whether intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage could achieve a better maxillary arch distalization effect in clear aligner treatment compared to Class II elastics.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty adult patients with Class II dentition who were treated with whole maxillary arch distalization using clear aligners were collected. Either intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage (miniscrew group, n = 17) or intermaxillary Class II elastics (Class II elastic group, n = 13) were used to support maxillary arch distalization. Three-dimensional predicted and achieved displacements, and angular changes of maxillary posterior teeth and anterior teeth, were measured and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The achieved distalization efficiency was 36.2%-43.9% in the posterior teeth and the retraction efficiency was 36.9%-49.4% in the anterior teeth. No statistically significant differences were found in maxillary arch distalization efficiency between the groups. The miniscrew group achieved less incisor extrusion and posterior tooth distal tipping than the Class II elastic group. Both groups achieved comparable arch expansion, posterior tooth buccal inclination, and anterior tooth lingual inclination.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage and intermaxillary Class II elastics achieved comparable efficiency in maxillary arch distalization. However, the miniscrew anchorage showed better vertical control in anterior teeth and mesiodistal tipping control in posterior teeth.</p>","PeriodicalId":94224,"journal":{"name":"The Angle orthodontist","volume":"94 4","pages":"383-391"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11210513/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Miniscrew anchorage versus Class II elastics for maxillary arch distalization using clear aligners.\",\"authors\":\"Fen Liu, Jian Liu, Mengying Guo, Zhihua Li, Guang Shu, Fanfan Dai\",\"doi\":\"10.2319/110723-743.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To identify whether intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage could achieve a better maxillary arch distalization effect in clear aligner treatment compared to Class II elastics.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty adult patients with Class II dentition who were treated with whole maxillary arch distalization using clear aligners were collected. Either intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage (miniscrew group, n = 17) or intermaxillary Class II elastics (Class II elastic group, n = 13) were used to support maxillary arch distalization. Three-dimensional predicted and achieved displacements, and angular changes of maxillary posterior teeth and anterior teeth, were measured and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The achieved distalization efficiency was 36.2%-43.9% in the posterior teeth and the retraction efficiency was 36.9%-49.4% in the anterior teeth. No statistically significant differences were found in maxillary arch distalization efficiency between the groups. The miniscrew group achieved less incisor extrusion and posterior tooth distal tipping than the Class II elastic group. Both groups achieved comparable arch expansion, posterior tooth buccal inclination, and anterior tooth lingual inclination.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage and intermaxillary Class II elastics achieved comparable efficiency in maxillary arch distalization. However, the miniscrew anchorage showed better vertical control in anterior teeth and mesiodistal tipping control in posterior teeth.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Angle orthodontist\",\"volume\":\"94 4\",\"pages\":\"383-391\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11210513/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Angle orthodontist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2319/110723-743.1\",\"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/10.2319/110723-743.1","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
目的材料和方法:收集30名使用透明矫治器进行全颌牙弓远隔治疗的II类牙成年患者:收集了30名使用透明矫治器进行全上颌牙弓远端矫治的II类牙列成年患者。颌内微型螺钉固定(微型螺钉组,n = 17)或颌间II类弹性体(II类弹性体组,n = 13)用于支持上颌牙弓远端矫治。测量并比较了上颌后牙和前牙的三维预测位移和实现位移以及角度变化:结果:后牙的远化效率为 36.2%-43.9%,前牙的牵引效率为 36.9%-49.4%。两组的上颌牙弓远端矫治效率无明显统计学差异。与 II 类弹性组相比,迷你螺钉组的门牙挤压和后牙远端倾倒较少。两组的牙弓扩张、后牙颊侧倾斜和前牙舌侧倾斜程度相当:结论:颌内微型螺钉固定和颌间二类弹性体在上颌牙弓远端化方面的效率相当。然而,微型螺钉固定器对前牙的垂直控制和对后牙的中轴倾斜控制更好。
Miniscrew anchorage versus Class II elastics for maxillary arch distalization using clear aligners.
Objectives: To identify whether intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage could achieve a better maxillary arch distalization effect in clear aligner treatment compared to Class II elastics.
Materials and methods: Thirty adult patients with Class II dentition who were treated with whole maxillary arch distalization using clear aligners were collected. Either intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage (miniscrew group, n = 17) or intermaxillary Class II elastics (Class II elastic group, n = 13) were used to support maxillary arch distalization. Three-dimensional predicted and achieved displacements, and angular changes of maxillary posterior teeth and anterior teeth, were measured and compared.
Results: The achieved distalization efficiency was 36.2%-43.9% in the posterior teeth and the retraction efficiency was 36.9%-49.4% in the anterior teeth. No statistically significant differences were found in maxillary arch distalization efficiency between the groups. The miniscrew group achieved less incisor extrusion and posterior tooth distal tipping than the Class II elastic group. Both groups achieved comparable arch expansion, posterior tooth buccal inclination, and anterior tooth lingual inclination.
Conclusions: Intramaxillary miniscrew anchorage and intermaxillary Class II elastics achieved comparable efficiency in maxillary arch distalization. However, the miniscrew anchorage showed better vertical control in anterior teeth and mesiodistal tipping control in posterior teeth.