本文選題：種植體　切入點(diǎn)：支抗　出處：《大連醫(yī)科大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：目的:探討應(yīng)用微種植體支抗治療成人上頜前突矯治前后上頜(?)平面的變化,以及上頜前牙與后牙水平向、垂直向的改變,為臨床上前后牙移動(dòng)時(shí)對(?)平面的控制提供參考依據(jù)。方法:從沈陽市口腔醫(yī)院2014年～2016年就診的所有上頜前突的患者中篩選出符合納入條件的矯治結(jié)束病例48份。根據(jù)治療方法分為實(shí)驗(yàn)組和對照組,每組24例,實(shí)驗(yàn)組患者男性8例,女性16例,平均年齡27.17 ± 5.10歲;對照組患者男性10例,女性14例,平均年齡25.90 ± 6.07歲。矯治設(shè)計(jì)均為拔除雙側(cè)上頜第一雙尖牙,實(shí)驗(yàn)組利用種植體支抗滑動(dòng)內(nèi)收上前牙,關(guān)閉拔牙間隙;對照組利用口外弓支抗滑動(dòng)內(nèi)收上前牙,關(guān)閉拔牙間隙。數(shù)據(jù)統(tǒng)計(jì)采用SPSS17.0軟件進(jìn)行分析,對兩組患者矯治前后頭顱側(cè)位片數(shù)據(jù)的平均值和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差分別采用配對t檢驗(yàn)進(jìn)行對比分析,兩種矯治方法的治療前后變化量的比較進(jìn)行獨(dú)立樣本t檢驗(yàn),檢驗(yàn)水準(zhǔn)P0.05說明差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。結(jié)果:兩組患者矯治結(jié)束后均能獲得良好的咬合關(guān)系,但在前后牙移動(dòng)、上頜(?)平面及下頜平面角的控制上有所差異。上頜(?)平面(OP-SN)的變化實(shí)驗(yàn)組增大3.2°,對照組增大4.5°,P0.01,差異具有高度顯著性意義。下頜平面角(MP-SN)實(shí)驗(yàn)組無明顯改變,對照組增加1.9°,P0.01,差異具有高度顯著性意義。前牙覆(?)(OB)覆蓋(0J)改變兩組對比不明顯,P0.05,無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。上頜中切牙切緣至腭平面的垂直向距離(U1-PP)實(shí)驗(yàn)組增加了 0.4mm，對照組增加了 1.7mm,P0.01,兩組數(shù)值變化差異顯著;上頜中切牙根尖至RL線的距離(U1R-RL)實(shí)驗(yàn)組減小1.5mm,對照組減小0.9mm,P0.05,兩組數(shù)據(jù)變化差異顯著;水平向,上頜中切牙至RL線的距離(U1-RL)實(shí)驗(yàn)組減小6.8mm,對照組減小4.7mm,P0.01,兩組數(shù)值差異顯著。在垂直向,上頜第一磨牙治療前后兩組不存在顯著差異;水平向,實(shí)驗(yàn)組上頜第一磨牙遠(yuǎn)中移動(dòng)0.1mm,對照組近中移動(dòng)2.2mm,P0.01,差異具有高度顯著性意義。結(jié)論:1.微種植體在治療上頜前突的過程中可以提供穩(wěn)固的支抗,充分利用拔牙間隙,上前牙回收明顯、有效避免了后牙支抗的喪失。2.應(yīng)用微種植體支抗內(nèi)收上前牙的過程中,上頜(?)平面會(huì)發(fā)生順時(shí)針旋轉(zhuǎn)。3.利用微種植體支抗治療上頜前突較口外支抗能減少上頜(?)平面的順時(shí)針旋轉(zhuǎn),更好的控制垂直向距離,有效避免了下頜骨的順時(shí)針旋轉(zhuǎn)。
[Abstract]:Objective: to explore the application of microimplant Anchorage in the treatment of adult maxillary protrusion before and after treatment. ) the changes of the plane and the horizontal and vertical direction of the maxillary anterior and posterior teeth are related to the clinical changes of the anterior and posterior teeth. Methods: from 2014 to 2016, 48 patients with maxillary protrusion were selected and divided into experimental group and control group. There were 24 patients in each group, 8 males and 16 females in the experimental group with an average age of 27.17 鹵5.10 years, and 10 males and 14 females in the control group with an average age of 25.90 鹵6.07 years. The experimental group used implant Anchorage to close the extraction space, while the control group used external arch to close the extraction space. SPSS17.0 software was used to analyze the data. The average value and standard deviation of head lateral radiographs before and after orthodontic treatment were analyzed by paired t test, and the changes of the two methods before and after treatment were compared with independent sample t test. Results: two groups of patients after orthodontic treatment can obtain a good occlusion relationship, but in front and back teeth movement, maxillary? ) there are differences in the control of the angle between the plane and the mandible. ) the changes of OP-SNs in the experimental group increased 3.2 擄, the control group increased 4.5 擄(P0.01), the difference was highly significant, but there was no significant change in the experimental group, and the increase in the control group was 1.9 擄(P0.01), the difference was highly significant. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P 0.05). The vertical distance from the incisor of maxillary incisor to the palatal plane was increased by 0.4 mm in the experimental group and 1.7 mm in the control group (P 0.01). The difference between the two groups was significant. The distance from the root tip to the RL line of maxillary central incisor decreased by 1.5 mm in the experimental group and 0.9 mm in the control group (P 0.05). The distance between the maxillary central incisor and the RL line decreased by 6.8 mm in the experimental group and 4.7 mm in the control group (P 0.01). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the vertical direction, the maxillary first molar before and after treatment. The maxillary first molar moved 0.1 mm far in the experimental group and the control group moved 2.2 mm in the distance (P 0.01), the difference was significant. Conclusion: the microimplant can provide stable Anchorage during the treatment of maxillary protrusion, and make full use of the extraction space. The recovery of anterior teeth is obvious, which effectively avoids the loss of Anchorage of posterior teeth. ) the plane will rotate clockwise. 3. Using microimplant Anchorage to treat maxillary protrusion can reduce maxillary bulge than external Anchorage. The clockwise rotation of the plane can better control the vertical distance and effectively avoid the clockwise rotation of the mandible.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R783.5
，

本文編號：1595869