Tianrui Yang, Lishan Jiang, Weiman Sun, Meng Zhu, Ke Jiang, Houxuan Li, Lang Lei
{"title":"使用透明矫正器和固定矫治器治疗的成人开放性龈囊的发生率和严重程度:一项回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Tianrui Yang, Lishan Jiang, Weiman Sun, Meng Zhu, Ke Jiang, Houxuan Li, Lang Lei","doi":"10.1186/s13005-023-00375-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To evaluate the incidence and severity of open gingival embrasures (OGEs) in adult patients treated with clear aligners and fixed appliances.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred non-extraction adult subjects with less than 5 mm of crowding (mean age, 24.6 ± 3.8 years) were enrolled in this retrospective study. The subjects were divided into the clear aligner (n = 100) and fixed appliance group (n = 100). The intraoral photographs were utilized to determine the incidence of OGEs in the upper arch between maxillary central incisors, as well as the lower arch between mandibular central incisors. Crown overlap, crown shape, posttreatment root angulation, the distance from the interproximal contact point (ICP) to the alveolar bone crest (ABC) after treatment and interproximal enamel reduction (IPR) were determined in the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of OGEs between maxillary and mandibular central incisors after orthodontic treatment was 35.0% and 38.0% in the clear aligner group, respectively, significantly higher than that (18.0% and 24.0%) in the fixed appliance group (P < 0.05). The average area of an OGE after clear aligner treatment was larger both in the maxilla (0.16 ± 0.12mm<sup>2</sup>) and mandible (0.21 ± 0.24mm<sup>2</sup>) compared with that (0.05 ± 0.03mm<sup>2</sup> and 0.05 ± 0.06mm<sup>2</sup>) after fixed appliance treatment (P < 0.05). No difference was found regarding pretreatment crown overlap, crown shape, treatment duration, posttreatment root angulation, amount and distribution of IPR and the distance from ICP to ABC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The incidence and severity of OGEs were higher in adults treated with clear aligners. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of OGEs during treatment with clear aligners.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":"19 1","pages":"30"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10351162/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The incidence and severity of open gingival embrasures in adults treated with clear aligners and fixed appliances: a retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Tianrui Yang, Lishan Jiang, Weiman Sun, Meng Zhu, Ke Jiang, Houxuan Li, Lang Lei\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13005-023-00375-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To evaluate the incidence and severity of open gingival embrasures (OGEs) in adult patients treated with clear aligners and fixed appliances.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred non-extraction adult subjects with less than 5 mm of crowding (mean age, 24.6 ± 3.8 years) were enrolled in this retrospective study. The subjects were divided into the clear aligner (n = 100) and fixed appliance group (n = 100). The intraoral photographs were utilized to determine the incidence of OGEs in the upper arch between maxillary central incisors, as well as the lower arch between mandibular central incisors. Crown overlap, crown shape, posttreatment root angulation, the distance from the interproximal contact point (ICP) to the alveolar bone crest (ABC) after treatment and interproximal enamel reduction (IPR) were determined in the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of OGEs between maxillary and mandibular central incisors after orthodontic treatment was 35.0% and 38.0% in the clear aligner group, respectively, significantly higher than that (18.0% and 24.0%) in the fixed appliance group (P < 0.05). The average area of an OGE after clear aligner treatment was larger both in the maxilla (0.16 ± 0.12mm<sup>2</sup>) and mandible (0.21 ± 0.24mm<sup>2</sup>) compared with that (0.05 ± 0.03mm<sup>2</sup> and 0.05 ± 0.06mm<sup>2</sup>) after fixed appliance treatment (P < 0.05). No difference was found regarding pretreatment crown overlap, crown shape, treatment duration, posttreatment root angulation, amount and distribution of IPR and the distance from ICP to ABC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The incidence and severity of OGEs were higher in adults treated with clear aligners. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of OGEs during treatment with clear aligners.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10351162/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-023-00375-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-023-00375-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The incidence and severity of open gingival embrasures in adults treated with clear aligners and fixed appliances: a retrospective cohort study.
Background: To evaluate the incidence and severity of open gingival embrasures (OGEs) in adult patients treated with clear aligners and fixed appliances.
Methods: Two hundred non-extraction adult subjects with less than 5 mm of crowding (mean age, 24.6 ± 3.8 years) were enrolled in this retrospective study. The subjects were divided into the clear aligner (n = 100) and fixed appliance group (n = 100). The intraoral photographs were utilized to determine the incidence of OGEs in the upper arch between maxillary central incisors, as well as the lower arch between mandibular central incisors. Crown overlap, crown shape, posttreatment root angulation, the distance from the interproximal contact point (ICP) to the alveolar bone crest (ABC) after treatment and interproximal enamel reduction (IPR) were determined in the two groups.
Results: The incidence of OGEs between maxillary and mandibular central incisors after orthodontic treatment was 35.0% and 38.0% in the clear aligner group, respectively, significantly higher than that (18.0% and 24.0%) in the fixed appliance group (P < 0.05). The average area of an OGE after clear aligner treatment was larger both in the maxilla (0.16 ± 0.12mm2) and mandible (0.21 ± 0.24mm2) compared with that (0.05 ± 0.03mm2 and 0.05 ± 0.06mm2) after fixed appliance treatment (P < 0.05). No difference was found regarding pretreatment crown overlap, crown shape, treatment duration, posttreatment root angulation, amount and distribution of IPR and the distance from ICP to ABC.
Conclusions: The incidence and severity of OGEs were higher in adults treated with clear aligners. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of OGEs during treatment with clear aligners.