小型下颌后退位（牙合）板在前牙反（牙合）矫治中的应用

目的：在前牙反（牙合）矫治中应用一种小型下颌后退位（牙合）板后退下颌,评价其矫治AngleⅢ类功能性-轻、中度骨性前牙反（牙合）病例的临床应用效果.方法：应用小型下颌后退位（牙合）板治疗反（牙合）328例.在打开咬合的同时后退下颌,同时粘固上下颌托槽进行排齐整平.结果：患者侧貌在戴用后退位（牙合）板后明显改善,下颌的有效后退使反（牙合）的矫治变得简单化,治疗时间较传统矫治明显缩短.远期随访疗效肯定.结论：小型下颌后退位（牙合）板适用于下颌可适度后退的前牙反（牙合）病例,可快速矫治前牙反（牙合）.是较固定反式TBA联合前牵引更为理想的装置,结构更小巧,制作更简便,更适用于临床应用.     

（牙合）垫舌簧＋上颌直丝弓矫治恒牙初期Ⅲ类错（牙合）

患者男,13.5岁,因前牙反（牙合）影响外貌求治.矫治前面（牙合）像及X线片见图1,临床检查：上颌后缩,下颌前突,前牙反（牙合）,下前牙代偿性舌倾,上前牙区轻度拥挤,下颌可以后退至对刃.诊断：安氏Ⅲ类错（牙合）.本病例采用（牙合）垫舌簧首先解除前牙反（牙合）（见图2）,然后上颌直丝弓矫治器排齐牙列,并关闭反（牙合）解除后上前牙区出现的散在间隙,下颌自动调整咬合.     

Activator联合头帽颏兜矫治儿童前牙反(牙合)

目的：观察颏兜Ⅲ类牵引与功能矫治器Activator矫治Ⅲ类错[牙合]的效果。方法：采用颏兜口外牵引联合功能性矫治器矫治38例前牙反[牙合]病例。结果：有效地抑制了下颌骨的前伸及发育、上颌骨与牙弓的发育均有改善、磨牙胎关系基本达到安氏Ⅰ类关系。凹面型得到改善。结论：颏兜与Activator联合使用能够有效地纠正早期牙列反牙台,疗效显著,稳定。但下颌牙列舌倾及高角患者不宜使用Activator。     

唇腭裂患者与安氏Ⅲ类错患者的颅面结构的比较

目的:比较单侧唇腭裂患者与安氏Ⅲ类错(牙合)患者在颅面部的形态结构上的差异。方法:样本包括39例12~15岁的单侧完全或不完全唇腭裂患者,均在2-3岁前行唇腭裂修复术;另外选取40例12~15岁前牙反(牙合)的患者作为对照组,反(牙合)组患者均不需要进行外科手术,两组之间进行头颅定位侧位片的比较分析。结果:唇腭裂患者的上下颌骨的发育均较前牙反(牙合)患者小,同时唇腭裂患者的下颌角较大,下颌平面较陡,相比安氏Ⅲ类组有高角型错(牙合)的趋势;而唇腭裂组患者的上前牙较为直立,下切牙的位置两组间则无显著性差异。结论:唇腭裂组患者的上下颌骨发育较安氏Ⅲ类患者小,下颌角较大,下颌平面向下向后旋转。     

唇腭裂患者与安氏Ⅲ类错牙(牙合)患者的颅面结构的比较

目的比较单侧唇腭裂患者与安氏Ⅲ类错(牙合)患者在颅面部的形态结构上的差异.方法样本包括39例12～15岁的单侧完全或不完全唇腭裂患者,均在2～3岁前行唇腭裂修复术;另外选取40例12～15岁前牙反(牙合)的患者作为对照组.反(牙合)组患者均不需要进行外科手术,两组之间进行头颅定位侧位片的比较分析.结果唇腭裂患者的上下颌骨的发育均较前牙反(牙合)患者小,同时唇腭裂患者的下颌角较大,下颌平面较陡,相比安氏Ⅲ类组有高角型错(牙合)的趋势;而唇腭裂组患者的上前牙较为直立,下切牙的位置两组间则无显著性差异.结论唇腭裂组患者的上下颌骨发育较安氏Ⅲ类患者小,下颌角较大,下颌平面向下向后旋转.     

Activator联合头帽颏兜矫治儿童前牙反

目的观察颏兜Ⅲ类牵引与功能矫治器Activator矫治Ⅲ类错(牙合)的效果.方法采用颏兜口外牵引联合功能性矫治器矫治38例前牙反(牙合)病例.结果有效地抑制了下颌骨的前伸及发育、上颌骨与牙弓的发育均有改善、磨牙(牙合)关系基本达到安氏Ⅰ类关系.凹面型得到改善.结论颏兜与Activator联合使用能够有效地纠正早期牙列反(牙合),疗效显著,稳定.但下颌牙列舌倾及高角患者不宜使用Activator.     

Ⅲ类颌间牵引治疗无生长潜力唇腭裂术后患者前牙反（牙合）的机制研究

目的：比较单侧完全性唇腭裂术后患者前牙反（牙合）解除前后颅面结构变化,探讨Ⅲ类颌间牵引治疗单侧完全性唇腭裂术后患者前牙反（牙合）的机制。方法：选择单侧完全性唇腭裂术后前牙反（牙合）患者20名,其中男15名,女5名,平均年龄（14.36±1.06）岁。所有患者在牙列排齐和整平的基础上行Ⅲ类颌间牵引,测量前牙反（牙合）解除前后头颅定位侧位片上反映颅面结构的各项指标,用配对t检验比较治疗前后的变化。结果：前牙反（牙合）解除后,SNB、L1-MP、OP-SN、NLA、ULP减小,ANB、MP-SN、NA-PA、U1-SN、U6-FH、L1-MP、L6-MP、ULL、LLL、LLP、UL-EP增大,差异有统计学意义。前牙反（牙合）解除前后SNA、U1-FH、LL-EP、ISD差异无统计学意义。结论：对于恒牙期唇腭裂术后反（牙合）的患者,Ⅲ类颌间牵引在纠正上下颌牙齿及牙槽关系不调的同时,能掩饰颌骨矢状向Ⅲ类关系,使软组织侧貌得到显著改善。     

伴功能性因素前牙反牙合矫治前后下颌位置的头影测量分析

目的：分析伴功能因素前牙反患者矫治前牙尖交错位、下颌后退至切牙对刃位与矫治结束后牙尖交错位3种不同位置的相关关系。方法：对18例前牙反伴下颌能后退至切对切的患者，采用固定矫治技术进行矫治。拍摄矫治之前牙尖交错位（T1）、下颌后退至切牙对刃位（T2）及矫治结束牙尖交错位（T3）X 线头颅侧位片。采用方差分析对相关 X 线头影测量项目结果3组数据间进行相互比较，进行检验分析。结果：经平均25个月的治疗，前牙的反得以矫治，磨牙关系为 I 类， SNB、ANB、MP-FH、MP-SN、U1-SN、L1-MP、Y轴角、ANS-Me 这几项测量项目的3组数据之间的 F 检验结果有统计学意义。结论：伴功能性因素前牙反经固定矫治技术治疗后，在矢状向和垂直向上下颌骨位置处于治疗前牙尖交错位与后退至切牙对刃位之间，且更接近于后退位。     

改良型Bionator矫治反牙合的头影测量研究

目的　研究改良型Bionator矫治器矫治早期反牙合颅颌面的改变。方法　采用改良型Bionator矫治器矫治乳牙期及替牙期前牙反牙合88例 ,对治疗前后的头颅侧位片头影侧量分析研究。结果　矫治后上颌长度及突度增大 ,上切牙唇倾 ;下颌髁突后退至正常位 ,上下颌基骨关系明显改善 ,乳牙反牙合改变最明显 ,矫治后呈Ⅰ类骨面型。替牙期反牙合矫治后仍遗留骨骼异常 ,骨面型仍属Ⅲ类 ,下切牙舌倾及颏角变小更趋严重 ;下面高及后面高增加。结论　改良型Bionator矫治反牙合 ,能有效促进上颌生长 ,抑制下颌生长 ,使颅颌面的生长方向趋向正常     

成人前牙深覆(牙合)深覆盖的正畸修复联合治疗

目的：探讨正畸联合烤瓷固定修复治疗成人前牙深覆耠深覆盖的临床效果。方法：对前牙深覆[牙合]深覆盖成人患者,采用固定矫治技术整平下颌牙弓,解除深覆[牙合],为上前牙内收获得有效间隙后,行上前牙的改向烤瓷固定修复。结果：治疗后上前牙平均内收5.0mm,下颌spee氏曲线降低1.5mm-2.0mm,患者的面部侧貌得到改善,牙列形态与咬合恢复满意,咀嚼功能良好,随访6～20个月无复发。结论：对前牙深覆[牙合]深覆盖的成人患者采用正畸：联合固定修复进行治疗,既可有效的改善患者的咀嚼功能与美观,又可使下颌牙的牙体组织得以保存,达到更好的口腔修复效果。     

前方牵引治疗替牙期唇腭裂术后反（牙合）对患者咬合功能的影响

目的 研究前方牵引治疗替牙期唇腭裂术后反（牙合）对患者咬合功能的影响.方法 以15名替牙期单侧完全性唇腭裂术后反（牙合）患者作为研究对象,对其进行前方牵引治疗,并在治疗前后进行咬合功能检查.结果 牙尖交错位（intercuspal position,ICP）习惯咬牙状态（habitual biting）（ICP-HB）时,从最初牙尖接触到最大牙尖交错所需的时间（occlusion time,OT）在治疗前后无明显变化.治疗后咬合接触点增加（P＜0.05）,颞肌前部、咬肌肌电值增加（P＜0.05）,咬合力不对称指数和颞肌前部、咬肌肌电不对称指数无明显变化.牙尖交错位最大力紧咬牙状态（maximal clenching）（ICP-MC）时,治疗后颞肌肌电值增加（P＜0.05）,咬肌肌电值有增加趋势,但无统计学意义.结论 替牙期唇腭裂术后反（牙合）患者在前方牵引治疗后,能在一定程度上改善咬合功能,但仍需要二期系统正畸治疗完善咬合关系的调整.     

Midfacial morphology in adult unoperated complete unilateral cleft lip and palate patients

OBJECTIVE: To examine lateral cephalometric radiographs of adult unoperated cleft lip and palate patients for the purpose of clarifying whether maxillary deficiencies observed in treated cleft patients result from intrinsic defects or surgical intervention early in life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study examined lateral cephalograms of 30 adult patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP). The lateral cephalograms were traced and evaluated for size and position of the cranial base, maxilla, maxillary dentition, mandible, and mandibular dentition as well as for vertical relationships. Comparisons with 30 adult noncleft individuals were made. RESULTS: In unoperated adult cleft lip and palate patients, the cranial base angle was increased with the anterior cranial base reduced in length. The maxilla was found to be normal in size and somewhat prognathic in position. Both the maxillary and mandibular incisors were relatively upright. The mandible was smaller in size and posteriorly positioned. CONCLUSIONS: The potential for normal growth of the maxilla exists in patients with CUCLP. It is likely that disturbances of maxillary growth in surgically operated cleft patients are related primarily to the surgical intervention.     

The role of the orthodontist in the treatment of adolescents with orofacial clefts

In the orthodontic treatment of patients with clefts the main aim is to maximize the growth and development of the maxillary complex and, at the same time, to improve functional efficiency and facial aesthetics. The commonest malocclusions found in adolescents with lip and palate clefts are: frontal or anterior crossbite; posterior or buccal crossbite which is either unilateral or bilateral; retrusion of the middle third of the face to a greater or a lesser degree; open bite; and finally malformation and displacement of the teeth adjacent to the cleft. Treatment may be divided into: correction of malocclusions in the transverse plane; correction in the antero-posterior plane; vertical corrections; and correction of misplaced individual teeth. Posterior (lateral) crossbite can be corrected by both gradual and rapid (forced) expansion using various removable appliances. Following this, correction of anterior crossbite and restoration of vertical occlusal relationships will be necessary. Finally, misplaced individual teeth will need to be repositioned. Traumatic surgery and consequent scar tissue affects the growth of the maxillary arch and the development of the occlusion. This was demonstrated in a comparative analysis of monozygotic and dizygotic twins discordant for clefts as well as in twin pairs whose clefts were non-identical in type and extent. The adolescents who still have unoperated clefts have special problems.     

前方牵引治疗单侧完全性唇腭裂患者术后前牙反[牙合]畸形的研究

目的探讨前方牵引治疗单侧完全性唇腭裂（UCLP）患者术后前牙反[牙合]畸形的效果。方法进行前瞻性临床研究设计,UCLP术后骨性前牙反[牙合]患者治疗组18例,年龄9．63±1．24岁,观察对照组14例,平均8．71±1．92岁,均处于生长发育高峰前期。使用前方牵引进行治疗,治疗或观察前后拍摄头颅侧位片并测量,进行成组设计和配对设计t检验。结果UCLP治疗组前方牵引后,上颌骨前移;下颌后移合并后下旋转;上下颌间关系和面型改善明显,上颌与下颌改变的比值为1：1．7。对照组上下颌不调、前牙反覆盖、凹面型加重。结论UCLP术后轻中度骨性前牙反[牙合]畸形,前方牵引能够促进上颌骨向前,改善上下颌骨关系和软组织面型,应该早期矫形治疗。     

Early assessment of dental arch development in repaired unilateral cleft lip and unilateral cleft lip and palate versus controls.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate dental arch relationships and dimensions, relative to an age matched noncleft sample, in Caucasian 3-year-old children with repaired unilateral cleft lip (UCL) or unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). DESIGN: Prospective, cross-sectional, case-control study performed in Scotland, U.K. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven children with repaired unilateral cleft lip, 16 children with repaired unilateral cleft lip and palate, and 78 children as controls. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dental arch relationships and linear arch dimensions. RESULTS: Prevalence of Class III incisor relationship was 31.3% in children with unilateral cleft lip and palate compared with 9.1% in children with unilateral cleft lip. A buccal crossbite was present in 36% of children with unilateral cleft lip, compared with 75.6% of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate.Mean linear maxillary arch dimensions did not differ significantly between children with unilateral cleft lip and the controls. Except for second intermolar width, statistically significant differences existed in mean linear maxillary arch dimensions between the unilateral cleft lip and the unilateral cleft lip and palate groups; the mean linear maxillary arch dimensions were significantly greater in the control group than in the unilateral cleft lip and palate group. The mean cleft-affected anterior quadrant length appeared to be the arch dimension with the greatest power of discrimination among the three groups. There were no significant differences in mean linear mandibular arch dimensions among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior crossbite was almost three times more common in the unilateral cleft lip and palate group than in the unilateral cleft lip group. Mean linear maxillary arch dimensions differed significantly between the unilateral cleft lip and palate group and the control group. There were no significant differences in mean linear maxillary arch dimensions between unilateral cleft lip and controls or between mean linear mandibular arch dimensions for unilateral cleft lip, unilateral cleft lip and palate, and controls.     

应用上颌前牵引治疗唇腭裂患者术后上颌发育不足的回顾分析

唇腭裂畸形是人类最常见的先天发育性缺陷之一。目前,唇腭裂手术是治疗畸形的主要手段,但术后患者常出现上颌发育不足,通常表现为面中部发育不足、凹陷,前牙反,严重影响了患者的面容美观和心理健康。上颌前牵引是通过牵引装置作用于上颌牙齿来刺激上颌骨周围4个骨缝的改建,进而促进上颌骨向前移位,抑制下颌骨向前生长,改善凹陷的面型。本文就前方牵引治疗唇腭裂患者术后前牙反的报道作一综述。     

PATTERN OF DISOCCLUSION IN PATIENTS WITH COMPLETE CLEFT LIP AND PALATE

Objective:

to analyze the pattern of disocclusion during excursive mandibular movements and presence or absence of occlusal interferences and occlusal pathologies (gingival recession and abfraction).

Method:

examination of 120 individuals divided into two groups, as follows: Group 1-90 patients with complete cleft lip and palate (study group), subdivided into 30 patients with complete left unilateral cleft lip and palate, 30 patients with complete right unilateral cleft lip and palate and 30 patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate; Group 2-30 individuals without clefts (control group).

Results:

58.8% of patients in Group 1 presented unilateral or bilateral canine guidance, 26.6% presented unilateral or bilateral group function and 54.4% presented lateral movements through the posterior teeth. Regarding protrusive movements, 80% presented anterior guidance and 20% presented posterior guidance. In Group 2, 69.6% of individuals presented unilateral or bilateral canine guidance, 43.2% presented unilateral or bilateral group function and only 13.3% presented lateral movements through the posterior teeth; 3.4% presented protrusion through the posterior teeth.

Conclusions:

there was no difference in the pattern of disocclusion between subgroups of patients with clefts. Group 2 presented predominance of bilateral group function, whereas Group 1 presented a higher prevalence of posterior guidance during lateral movements. Protrusion occurred primarily through anterior guidance in Group 2 and through the posterior teeth in Group 1. There was high prevalence of occlusal interferences at the molar area for both groups, yet with no correlation with occlusal pathologies (recession and abfraction).