Xinyu Yan, Xiaoqi Zhang, Linghuan Ren, Yi Yang, Qingxuan Wang, Yanzi Gao, Qingsong Jiang, Fan Jian, Hu Long, Wenli Lai
{"title":"透明矫治器在实现 II 类 2 级患者门牙前倾和内陷方面的效果:多变量分析。","authors":"Xinyu Yan, Xiaoqi Zhang, Linghuan Ren, Yi Yang, Qingxuan Wang, Yanzi Gao, Qingsong Jiang, Fan Jian, Hu Long, Wenli Lai","doi":"10.1186/s40510-023-00463-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The predictability of incisor movement achieved by clear aligners among Class II division 2 patients is poorly understood. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the effectiveness of clear aligners in proclining and intruding upper incisors and its influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eligible patients with Class II division 2 malocclusion were included. For clear aligner therapy, three types of incisor movements were designed: proclination, intrusion and labial movement. Pre-treatment and post-treatment dental models were superimposed. The differences between predicted and actual (DPA) tooth movement of incisors were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate linear regression were used to analyze the potential influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 51 patients and their 173 upper incisors were included. Actual incisor proclination and intrusion were less than predicted ones (both P < 0.001), while actual labial movement was greater than predicted one (P < 0.001). Predictability of incisor proclination and intrusion was 69.8% and 53.3%, respectively. Multivariate linear regression revealed that DPA of proclination was significantly positively associated with predicted proclination (B = 0.174, P < 0.001), ipsilateral premolar extraction (B = 2.773, P < 0.001) and ipsilateral canine proclination (B = 1.811, P < 0.05), while negatively associated with molar distalization (B = - 2.085, P < 0.05). The DPA of intrusion was significantly positively correlated with predicted intrusion (B = 0.556, P < 0.001) while negatively associated with labial mini-implants (B = - 1.466, P < 0.001). The DPA of labial movement was significantly positively associated with predicted labial movement (B = 0.481, P < 0.001), while negatively correlated with molar distalization (B = - 1.004, P < 0.001), labial mini-implants (B = - 0.738, P < 0.001) and age (B = - 0.486, P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For Class II division 2 patients, predicted incisor proclination (69.8%) and intrusion (53.3%) are partially achieved with clear aligner therapy. Excessive labial movement (0.7 mm) of incisors may be achieved. Incisor movement is influenced by predicted movement amount, premolar extraction, canine proclination, molar distalization, mini-implants and age.</p>","PeriodicalId":56071,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Orthodontics","volume":"24 1","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10068686/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of clear aligners in achieving proclination and intrusion of incisors among Class II division 2 patients: a multivariate analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Xinyu Yan, Xiaoqi Zhang, Linghuan Ren, Yi Yang, Qingxuan Wang, Yanzi Gao, Qingsong Jiang, Fan Jian, Hu Long, Wenli Lai\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40510-023-00463-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The predictability of incisor movement achieved by clear aligners among Class II division 2 patients is poorly understood. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the effectiveness of clear aligners in proclining and intruding upper incisors and its influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eligible patients with Class II division 2 malocclusion were included. For clear aligner therapy, three types of incisor movements were designed: proclination, intrusion and labial movement. Pre-treatment and post-treatment dental models were superimposed. The differences between predicted and actual (DPA) tooth movement of incisors were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate linear regression were used to analyze the potential influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 51 patients and their 173 upper incisors were included. Actual incisor proclination and intrusion were less than predicted ones (both P < 0.001), while actual labial movement was greater than predicted one (P < 0.001). Predictability of incisor proclination and intrusion was 69.8% and 53.3%, respectively. Multivariate linear regression revealed that DPA of proclination was significantly positively associated with predicted proclination (B = 0.174, P < 0.001), ipsilateral premolar extraction (B = 2.773, P < 0.001) and ipsilateral canine proclination (B = 1.811, P < 0.05), while negatively associated with molar distalization (B = - 2.085, P < 0.05). The DPA of intrusion was significantly positively correlated with predicted intrusion (B = 0.556, P < 0.001) while negatively associated with labial mini-implants (B = - 1.466, P < 0.001). The DPA of labial movement was significantly positively associated with predicted labial movement (B = 0.481, P < 0.001), while negatively correlated with molar distalization (B = - 1.004, P < 0.001), labial mini-implants (B = - 0.738, P < 0.001) and age (B = - 0.486, P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For Class II division 2 patients, predicted incisor proclination (69.8%) and intrusion (53.3%) are partially achieved with clear aligner therapy. Excessive labial movement (0.7 mm) of incisors may be achieved. Incisor movement is influenced by predicted movement amount, premolar extraction, canine proclination, molar distalization, mini-implants and age.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Progress in Orthodontics\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10068686/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Progress in Orthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-023-00463-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-023-00463-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:人们对透明矫治器在二类二阶患者中实现切牙移动的可预测性知之甚少。这项回顾性研究旨在确定透明矫治器对上切牙前倾和内收的有效性及其影响因素:方法:纳入符合条件的 II 类 2 分区错颌畸形患者。在透明矫治器治疗中,设计了三种切牙移动方式:前倾、内收和唇侧移动。将治疗前和治疗后的牙齿模型叠加在一起。分析了门牙预测移动和实际移动(DPA)之间的差异。采用单变量和多变量线性回归分析潜在的影响因素:共纳入 51 名患者及其 173 颗上门牙。实际门牙前倾和内陷均小于预测值(均为 P 结论:对于 II 类 2 分区患者,预测值小于预测值,但实际门牙前倾和内陷均小于预测值:对于二类二分裂患者,透明矫治器治疗可部分实现预测的门牙前倾(69.8%)和内收(53.3%)。门牙可实现过度的唇侧移动(0.7 毫米)。门牙移动受预测移动量、前磨牙拔除、犬齿前倾、磨牙远端化、迷你种植体和年龄的影响。
Effectiveness of clear aligners in achieving proclination and intrusion of incisors among Class II division 2 patients: a multivariate analysis.
Background: The predictability of incisor movement achieved by clear aligners among Class II division 2 patients is poorly understood. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the effectiveness of clear aligners in proclining and intruding upper incisors and its influencing factors.
Methods: Eligible patients with Class II division 2 malocclusion were included. For clear aligner therapy, three types of incisor movements were designed: proclination, intrusion and labial movement. Pre-treatment and post-treatment dental models were superimposed. The differences between predicted and actual (DPA) tooth movement of incisors were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate linear regression were used to analyze the potential influencing factors.
Results: A total of 51 patients and their 173 upper incisors were included. Actual incisor proclination and intrusion were less than predicted ones (both P < 0.001), while actual labial movement was greater than predicted one (P < 0.001). Predictability of incisor proclination and intrusion was 69.8% and 53.3%, respectively. Multivariate linear regression revealed that DPA of proclination was significantly positively associated with predicted proclination (B = 0.174, P < 0.001), ipsilateral premolar extraction (B = 2.773, P < 0.001) and ipsilateral canine proclination (B = 1.811, P < 0.05), while negatively associated with molar distalization (B = - 2.085, P < 0.05). The DPA of intrusion was significantly positively correlated with predicted intrusion (B = 0.556, P < 0.001) while negatively associated with labial mini-implants (B = - 1.466, P < 0.001). The DPA of labial movement was significantly positively associated with predicted labial movement (B = 0.481, P < 0.001), while negatively correlated with molar distalization (B = - 1.004, P < 0.001), labial mini-implants (B = - 0.738, P < 0.001) and age (B = - 0.486, P < 0.05).
Conclusions: For Class II division 2 patients, predicted incisor proclination (69.8%) and intrusion (53.3%) are partially achieved with clear aligner therapy. Excessive labial movement (0.7 mm) of incisors may be achieved. Incisor movement is influenced by predicted movement amount, premolar extraction, canine proclination, molar distalization, mini-implants and age.
期刊介绍:
Progress in Orthodontics is a fully open access, international journal owned by the Italian Society of Orthodontics and published under the brand SpringerOpen. The Society is currently covering all publication costs so there are no article processing charges for authors.
It is a premier journal of international scope that fosters orthodontic research, including both basic research and development of innovative clinical techniques, with an emphasis on the following areas:
• Mechanisms to improve orthodontics
• Clinical studies and control animal studies
• Orthodontics and genetics, genomics
• Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) control clinical trials
• Efficacy of orthodontic appliances and animal models
• Systematic reviews and meta analyses
• Mechanisms to speed orthodontic treatment
Progress in Orthodontics will consider for publication only meritorious and original contributions. These may be:
• Original articles reporting the findings of clinical trials, clinically relevant basic scientific investigations, or novel therapeutic or diagnostic systems
• Review articles on current topics
• Articles on novel techniques and clinical tools
• Articles of contemporary interest