种植体支抗矫正双颌前突畸形疗效回顾性研究

目的 对比研究微螺钉型种植体支抗与常规口内加强支抗矫正双颌前突的侧位头影测量及软组织美学分析结果变化，回顾性评价种植体支抗的疗效。方法 研究2011年1月至2012年12月第四军医大学口腔医学院正畸科成年双颌前突拔牙矫治患者62例，其中38例应用双颌后牙区微螺钉型种植体支抗内收前牙（种植支抗组），24例应用常规口内加强支抗（常规支抗组）。通过矫治前后X线头影测量、软组织美学分析和疗程疗效比较，明确不同支抗方式对治疗效果的影响。结果 两种支抗方式的疗程差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。治疗前后62例患者在矢状向上均出现牙列、牙槽突及上下唇软组织的位置改变，种植支抗组患者上下颌切牙切端平均内收7.23、5.89 mm，上下牙槽突点平均内收3.61、2.78 mm，上下唇突点平均内收3.21、2.24 mm；常规支抗组患者上下颌切牙切端平均内收4.62、4.17 mm，上下牙槽突点平均内收1.93、1.67 mm，上下唇突点平均内收2.13、1.82 mm，种植支抗组内收效果优于常规支抗组，差异均有统计学意义（均P＜0.01）。两组患者治疗前后上下颌骨基点在矢状向的位置差异均无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）。结论 微螺钉型种植体支抗在内收前牙、矫正双颌前突及改善面部美学效果方面优于传统常规支抗，但对颌骨并无矫形作用。

The retrospective study of the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion with micro-implant anchorage technique

Abstract：Objective To observe the cepholemetric and soft-tissue results of microscrew implant anchorage and TPA＋Nance orthodontic anchorage in the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion，and to evaluate the effect of microscrew implant anchorage. Methods The 62 adult patients with bimaxillary protrusion were divided into two groups；38 patients were reinforced with microscrew and 24 patients with TPA＋Nance orthodontic anchorage respectively. The cephalometric and soft-tissue results of the patients before and after treatment with two measures were evaluated. Results The treatment time of two groups was not significantly different. All the facial profile in the sagittal direction was improved significantly. In the microscrew implant anchorage group，the edge of upper and lower incisors was retracted 7.23 and 5.89 mm；the points of prosthion and infradental were retracted 3.61 and 2.78 mm；the points of Labrale superior and Labrale inferior were retracted 3.21 and 2.24 mm respectively. In the TPA＋Nance orthodontic anchorage group，the edge of upper and lower incisors was retracted 4.62 and 4.17 mm；the points of prosthion and infradental were retracted 1.93 and 1.67 mm；the points of Labrale superior and Labrale inferior were retracted 2.13 and 1.82 mm respectively. The retraction results in the microscrew implant anchorage group were superior to the TPA＋Nance orthodontic anchorage group（P＜0.01）.There were no significant differences between the two anchorage groups（P＞0.05）. Conclusion The retraction results of the dental arch，lips and alveolar in the microscrew implant anchorage group are superior to the TPA＋Nance orthodontic anchorage group in the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion.