正畸治疗中年龄因素对牙根吸收影响的研究

目的　探讨年龄因素在正畸治疗中对牙根吸收的影响作用。方法　配对测量正畸治疗前后牙根长度及牙根等级 ,分析牙根吸收及其分布情况。结果　正畸治疗前后牙根长度改变有组间差异 (P <0 .0 1)。正畸治疗前后牙根吸收等级分布没有组间差异 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论　正畸治疗中年龄因素并不是造成牙根吸收最重要的因素 ,它对牙根吸收的影响是有限的。     

Comparison of Orthodontic Root Resorption of Root-filled and Vital Teeth Using Micro–computed Tomography

ObjectiveTo evaluate the difference in orthodontic root resorption between root-filled and vital teeth.Material and MethodsSixteen individuals who required bilateral premolar tooth extraction due to orthodontic treatment and had a previously root-filled premolar tooth on one side were included in the study. The experimental group consisted of root-filled premolar teeth, and the control group consisted of contralateral vital premolar teeth. A 150-g buccally directed force was applied to these teeth using 0.017 × 0.025-inch TMA cantilever springs. The premolars were extracted 8 weeks after the application of force. Images were obtained using micro–computed tomography. Resorption measurements were obtained using the Image J program.ResultsThe mean values for resorption were 0.08869 mm³ for the root-filled teeth and 0.14077 mm³ for the contralateral teeth, indicating significantly less resorption for the root-filled teeth compared with the contralateral teeth after the application of orthodontic force (P = .003). In both groups, the most resorption was seen on the cervical-buccal and apical-lingual surfaces. The mean resorption value of the cervical region was 0.06305 mm³ in the control group and 0.0291 mm³ in the experimental group, and the difference was statistically significant (P = .002).ConclusionsRoot-filled teeth showed significantly less orthodontic root resorption than vital teeth.     

平面导板对正畸治疗中牙根吸收影响的临床研究

目的：探讨平面导板配合直丝弓矫治对牙根吸收的影响。方法：随机选择66例经过直丝弓矫治的成年非拔牙患者，其中33例配合使用平面导板治疗。治疗前后拍全口曲面断层片，分别测量2组治疗前后下颌4个切牙的牙根吸收等级，并经过计算机进行X^2检验。结果：2组正畸治疗后均有明显的牙根吸收，治疗前后牙根吸收等级有显著性差异（P〈0．01）。治疗后2组间牙根吸收等级也有显著性差异（P〈0．01）。结论：直丝弓配合平面导板矫治组较单独使用直丝弓矫治的牙根吸收更严重。     

面型对正畸支抗牙牙根吸收影响的临床研究

目的 探讨不同面型在正畸治疗中对支抗牙牙根吸收的影响。方法 选择120例经方丝弓矫治器治疗的患者,按面型分为高角型、正常型、低角型3个组,每组患者治疗前后分别拍摄头颅侧位定位片,配对测量分别被确定作为支抗的后牙或前牙正畸治疗前后牙根长度,将牙根长度改变量以计算机进行统计分析,并评价牙根吸收情况。结果3组病例正畸治疗前后支抗牙牙根长度改变有统计学意义(P<0.001)。3组之间相对应牙齿的牙根吸收量不同,高角型病例牙根吸收轻,而低角型病例牙根吸收重。组间不同的吸收量差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论 在正畸治疗中不同面型对支抗牙牙根吸收程度有不同影响,面型是影响支抗牙牙根吸收的一个重要因素。     

应用锥形束CT对成人上颌前磨牙牙根和根管系统形态的研究

目的：运用锥形束CT（CBCT）观察中国人群上颌前磨牙的牙根和根管系统的解剖形态,为临床根管治疗提供影像学依据。方法：选择200名患者的双侧上颌前磨牙（上颌第一前磨牙、上颌第二前磨牙各358颗）的CBCT扫描数据,使用NNT软件分析上颌第一、第二前磨牙的牙根数、根管数、根管分型以及双侧对称情况。结果：上颌第一前磨牙主要为单根（65.92%）和双根（33.80%）。上颌第二前磨牙主要为单根（93.85%）。上颌第一前磨牙的根管系统主要为双根管（84.36%）。上颌第二前磨牙的根管系统单、双根管比例接近（分别为52.79%和46.08%）。上颌第一前磨牙主要根管分型为：Ⅳ型（48.32%）、Ⅱ型（24.30%）和Ⅰ型（12.56%）。上颌第二前磨牙主要根管分型为：Ⅰ型（51.68%）、Ⅱ型（21.51%）和Ⅳ型（14.25%）。上颌第一、第二前磨牙的根管分型左右对称（对称率分别为74.57%和81.29%）。上颌前磨牙根管系统的主要变异为：管间交通支、颊根C形根管和多根管（树形根管或神经根样根管）。结论：上颌第一、第二前磨牙的根管系统主要为单根管和双根管。术前了解根管形态的变异是治疗成功的关键因素。     

正畸治疗时间长短与牙根吸收关系的研究

目的:探讨口腔固定正畸治疗的矫治疗程长短对牙根吸收的影响。方法:选取13~19岁安氏Ⅱ类I分类患者,拔除4个第一前磨牙后,通过直丝弓矫治器进行矫治,并且在疗程中选取未采用种植体支抗干预的患者36例。按整个固定矫治疗程分为:短期组(<18个月)和长期组(>24个月);牙根形态按等级分级,计算机进行统计分析各级頻数分布变化。对两组患者治疗前后,分别在牙冠处纵向固定5 mm结扎丝拍摄锥形束CT(cone beam computed tomography ,CBCT)片,并在CBCT上描画出上颌4颗切牙的轮廓,并进行牙根长度测量。通过牙根吸收等级计算公式计算出每颗牙齿矫治后牙根实际吸收量。结果:两组病例治疗后牙根吸收均达到1~2级居多;固定矫治治疗程超过2年的长期组牙根吸收达3~4级多于短期组,其差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);牙根长度吸收长期组多于短期组,其差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。结论:口腔固定正畸矫治疗程超过2年会加重正畸治疗中的牙根吸收,为临床治疗提供理论依据。     

颧牙槽嵴区骨宽度及皮质骨厚度的CBCT测量分析

目的:应用锥形束CT(CBCT)测量成年人与青少年的颧牙槽嵴区域的骨宽度、皮质骨厚度及窦底高度,并评价2组的差异,为临床中颧牙槽嵴区微种植体的植入提供参考。方法:选取成年人个别正常牙合志愿者和安氏Ⅰ类青少年患者各30例,获取其口腔颌面部CBCT扫描影像。测量颧牙槽嵴区域的骨宽度、皮质骨厚度及上颌窦底高度,并对测量数据进行统计学分析。结果:两实验组颧牙槽嵴区域均为第二前磨牙和第一磨牙之间的骨宽度最大,且每层的5个测量值均表现为随测量点向颅方移动骨宽度值逐渐减小。两实验组各层颧牙槽嵴区骨宽度与窦底高度成正相关关系。结论:成年人组各位置骨宽度平均值及皮质骨厚度平均值均较青少年组相应位置大。颧牙槽嵴区骨宽度随窦底高度增大而增大。2组样本上颌窦个体差异均非常大,植入微种植体前需拍摄CBCT以确定是否满足植入条件。     

上颌第一、第二恒磨牙牙根和根管系统的锥形束CT研究

目的：运用锥形束CT（CBCT）观察中国人群双侧上颌第一、第二磨牙的牙根和根管系统的解剖形态,为临床根管治疗提供依据。方法：选择200名患者的双侧上颌第一、第二恒磨牙（上颌第一恒磨牙354颗、上颌第二恒磨牙360颗）的CBCT扫描数据,使用NNT软件分析上颌第一、第二恒磨牙的牙根数、根管数、根管分型以及双侧对称情况。结果：上颌第一、第二磨牙主要为三根（99.44%和84.44%）。上颌第二磨牙的单根和双根较多见（15.28%）,其根管系统形态复杂,在根尖区有融合趋势。上颌第一磨牙的根管系统主要为3根四根管（78.97%）。上颌第二磨牙的三根管和四根管发现率接近（分别为47.37%和51.64%）。上颌第一磨牙的近颊根管系统主要根管分型为：Ⅳ型（57.79%）、Ⅱ型（19.83%）和Ⅰ型（15.58%）。上颌第二磨牙的近颊根管系统主要根管分型为：Ⅰ型（48.14%）、Ⅳ型（30.43%）和Ⅱ型（17.39%）。上颌第一、第二磨牙的远颊根和腭根主要为单根单根管,存在少量和罕见的变异。上颌第一、第二磨牙近颊根的根管数目和根管分型左右对称。结论：上颌第一磨牙近颊根管系统变异普遍存在,MB2根管为其主要的变异形式。上颌第二磨牙牙根数目和根管形态变异类型多,单根牙和双根牙的根管走向复杂多变。CBCT可以为识别根管形态提供准确依据。     

正畸治疗中拔牙与牙根吸收关系的临床研究

目的评价拔牙对正畸治疗中的牙根吸收的影响。方法选取120例年龄在11～18岁经方丝弓矫治器固定矫治治疗的青少年,分为拔牙组和不拔牙组,两组病人治疗前后分别拍摄全口曲面断层片,牙根形态按等级分级,计算机进行统计分析各等级频数分布变化。结果两组病例在治疗后牙根吸收均以1、2级居多、拔牙组治疗后牙根3、4级吸收多于未拔牙组,两组之间的差异有显著性(P<0.001)。结论拔牙治疗会加重正畸治疗中的牙根吸收。     

成人与青少年牙齿移动的比较

目的 研究成人与青少年牙齿移动过程中根尖和根周硬组织的变化。方法 采用Digora分析定位牙片,比较尖牙移动前后的牙根长度、牙槽骨密度以及牙槽骨高度。结果 成人与青少年移动前后的牙根长度,牙槽骨密度以及牙槽骨高度无显著性差异。结论 成人正畸与青少年正畸对根尖及根周硬组织均无影响。     

Retrospective Clinical Study of Marginal Bone Level Changes with Two Different Screw-Implant Types: Comparison Between Tissue Level (TE) and Bone Level (BL) Implant

Aim

The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare the amount of marginal bone loss (MBL) in a bone-level and a soft-tissue-level implant system, both of which have similar intra-bony shape and surface composition. A subgroup analysis was done to compare the amount of MBL of each implant type in relation to the different vertical placement within the respective groups of implants.

Materials and Methods

Records of all patients who underwent implantation for replacement of teeth using comparable bone level (BL) and soft tissue level implants (TE) from 1st January 2006 to 31st December 2009 were scrutinized. Initial depth of implant placement (IDIP) was measured for all implants. Marginal bone loss was measured in patients whose records were available at time point corresponding to 12, 24 and 36 months post insertion.

Results

Out of a total of 384 implants, 337 implants were included for study. The mean MBL for the BL implants were 0.3, 0.38, 0.48 and for TE implant were 0.6, 0.54 and 0.93 for time periods 12, 24 and 36 months respectively. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at time periods at 6–12 months, in later time periods, there was a slightly greater amount of MBL around TE implants as compared to BL implants (p < 0.001). When comparing the IDIP and MBL in the same implant type, there was a statistically significant (p < 0.001) positive correlation between the depth of implant placement and the amount of MBL, with deeper placed implants having more bone loss.

Conclusion

Within the limitations of this retrospective cohort study design, one can conclude that BL implants had statistically significant lesser MBL as compared to TE in time periods above 12 months. Although the difference is statistically significant, the difference may not be clinically significant. The IDIP had an influence on the amount of MBL, with deeper placed implants and screw structure of the implant placed below the bone, having more MBL in the period of study.     

Reliability of Circumferential Bone Level Assessment around Single Implants in Healed Ridges and Extraction Sockets Using Cone Beam CT

Purpose: Cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) provides three‐dimensional information and could absolutely be useful for evaluating circumferential implant bone levels. However, the accuracy and precision of the technique has not been described. The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy and precision of CBCT (i‐CAT®, Imaging Sciences International®, Hatfield, PA, USA) using periapical radiographs (PA) as a reference and to evaluate the circumferential bone level on CBCT around immediately loaded single implants placed in healed ridges (CIT, conventional implant treatment) and extraction sockets (IIT, immediate implant placement). Materials and Methods: PA and CBCT radiographs were obtained from 26 single Astra Tech Osseospeed? implants (Astra Tech AB, Mölndal, Sweden) 1 year after loading in respectively healed ridges (CIT) or extraction socket (IIT). For accuracy analysis, the three mesial and three distal interproximal levels obtained by CBCT were pooled to enable a comparison with PA. Precision was analyzed by intra‐ and interexaminer reliability calculation from mesial and distal sites on CBCT. The circumferential bone level considered all eight positions assessed on CBCT. Results: Accuracy of CBCT was low (R = 0.325/p = .019) given the fact that bone level of the total group was 0.70 mm (standard deviation [SD] 0.78, range 0.00–3.20) on PA and 0.23 mm (SD 0.27, 0.00–1.20) on CBCT (p < .001) with only 42% of the measurements showing deviation within 0.2 mm. However, intra‐ and interexaminer reliability were favorable (R ≥ 0.611/p < .001, ≥83%). The mean circumferential bone level on CBCT was 0.21 mm (SD 0.30) and 0.26 mm (SD 0.18) for IIT and CIT, respectively. The impact of the treatment strategy was not significant. Conclusion: PA should be the standard technique to assess interproximal bone level but correlates poorly with the CBCT measurements. However, the precision of CBCT was high. CBCT requires further improvements of hardware and/or software. Within the limitations of the study, there is an indication that the buccal bone 1 year after implant treatment is evenly preserved when implants are immediately loaded in extraction sockets or in healed bone.