论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较口外弓加强支抗和微型种植支抗对口腔正畸患者的矫治效果。方法:抽取郑州大学附属郑州市中心医院2018年3月至2020年7月收治的口腔正畸患者108例，按随机数字表法分为研究组与常规组，每组54例。常规组采用口外弓加强支抗，研究组采用微型种植支抗。比较两组矫治情况、口腔结构、口腔功能、牙龈情况、牙周炎性微环境及不良反应发生率。结果:研究组拔牙间隙关闭时间、矫治疗程短于常规组，矫治成功率(94.44%，51/54)高于常规组(79.63%，43/54)，n P<0.05。研究组磨牙前移位量少于常规组，上中切牙凸距差、上中切牙压低量、中切牙倾角差大于常规组(n P<0.05)。治疗后，研究组咬合力和咀嚼效率高于常规组(n P<0.05)，牙龈指数、菌斑指数低于常规组(n P<0.05)。治疗后，两组白细胞介素-6、肿瘤坏死因子-α、基质金属蛋白酶-2、基质金属蛋白酶-9水平均高于治疗前，但研究组增高幅度低于常规组(n P<0.05)。研究组不良反应发生率(7.41%，4/54)低于常规组(22.22%，12/54)，n P<0.05。n 结论:与口外弓加强支抗比较，微型种植支抗应用于口腔正畸患者，可缩短矫治时间，提高矫治成功率，改善口腔结构和口腔功能，减轻对牙龈损害，并可将降低牙周炎性反应，提高矫治安全性。“,”Objective:To compare the effect of extraoral arch reinforcement anchorage and micro-implant anchorage on orthodontic patients.Methods:A total of 108 orthodontic patients treated in Zhengzhou Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University from March 2018 to July 2020 were selected and divided into research group and routine group according to the random number table method, with 54 cases in each group. The routine group used extraoral arch reinforcement anchorage, and the research group used micro-implant anchorage. The situation of orthodontic treatment, oral structure, oral function, gingival condition, periodontitis microenvironment and incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups.Results:The closing time of extraction space and treatment course of the research group were shorter than those of the routine group, and the success rate of the treatment (94.44%, 51/54) was higher than that of the routine group (79.63%, 43/54), n P<0.05. The amount of anterior molar displacement of the research group was lower than that of routine group, and the differences in upper central incisor convexity, upper central incisor depression, and central incisor angle of the research group were higher than those of the routine group (n P<0.05). After treatment, bite force and chewing efficiency in research group were higher than those in routine group after treatment (n P<0.05). The gingival index and plaque index of research group were lower than those of routine group (n P<0.05). After treatment, the levels of interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, matrix metalloproteinase-2, matrix metalloproteinase-9 in the two groups were higher than those before treatment, but the increasing ranges of the research group were lower than that of the routine group (n P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in research group (7.41%, 4/54) was lower than that in routine group (22.22%, 12/54),n P<0.05.n Conclusions:Compared with extraoral arch reinforcement anchorage, the application of micro-implant anchorage in orthodontic patients can shorten the time of orthodontic treatment, improve the success rate of orthodontic treatment, improve the oral structure and oral function, reduce the gingival damage, reduce the periodontitis response, and improve the safety of orthodontic treatment.