论文部分内容阅读
目的 :比较不同类型错牙合畸形的牙弓形态。方法 :采用三维测量仪精密测量正常牙合及 4组不同类型错牙合(ClassⅠ双颌前突、ClassⅡ1、ClassⅡ2 、ClassⅢ )的原始模型 ,圆锥曲线模拟其牙弓形态。结果 :不同类型错牙合牙弓形态的差异有显著性 ,甚至某些分组的上下颌之间牙弓形态的差异也有显著性。结论 :临床上弯制弓丝时采用单一的标准牙弓形态是不完全科学的 ,应考虑错牙合的不同类型及其矫治前不同的牙弓形态以防止畸形复发。
Objective: To compare the different types of malocclusion arch morphology. Methods: The original model of normal occlusion and 4 groups of malocclusion (Class Ⅰ bimaxillary protrusion, Class Ⅱ 1, Class Ⅱ 2, Class Ⅲ) were measured by 3D measuring instrument. The conical curve was used to simulate the dental arch. Results: There were significant differences in the dental arch morphology between different types of malocclusion, and even some groups showed significant differences in the dental arch between the upper and lower jaws. CONCLUSIONS: It is not completely scientific to use a single standard arch form for clinically curved arch wire. Different types of malocclusion and different arch shapes before correction should be considered to prevent the recurrence of deformity.