中国实用口腔科杂志

中国实用口腔科杂志 ›› 2021, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (5): 560-564.DOI: 10.19538/j.kq.2021.05.010

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

利用ABO-OGS指数评价Damon Q自锁托槽与MBT托槽矫治效果研究

宋欣羽，钱玉芬   

  1. 上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院口腔正畸科，上海交通大学口腔医学院，国家口腔医学中心，国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心，上海市口腔医学重点实验室，上海  200011
  • 出版日期:2021-09-30 发布日期:2021-09-30
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金（81771104）

  • Online:2021-09-30 Published:2021-09-30

摘要： 目的    利用ABO-OGS指数评价Damon Q（DQ）自锁托槽与MBT托槽矫治拔除前磨牙病例的临床效果。方法    选取2011—2019年于上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院口腔正畸科就诊的需拔除前磨牙行正畸治疗的60例错牙合畸形患者进行回顾性分析，其中拔除上下颌第一前磨牙患者30例，拔除上颌第一前磨牙和下颌第二前磨牙患者30例。相同拔牙模式患者再根据矫治系统分为DQ自锁托槽组和MBT托槽组，每组各15例。利用ABO-OGS指数评价两组矫治效果。结果    DQ自锁托槽组矫治时间为（26.70 ± 4.53）个月，明显短于MBT托槽组［（32.10 ± 7.26）个月］，其差异有统计学意义（t = 3.458，P < 0.05）。在拔除上下颌第一前磨牙患者中，MBT托槽组总扣分低于DQ自锁托槽组，但其差异无统计学意义（t = -0.297，P > 0.05）；DQ自锁托槽组咬合接触项目扣分较MBT托槽组多，差异有统计学意义（t = 2.457，P < 0.05）。在拔除上颌第一前磨牙和下颌第二前磨牙患者中，DQ自锁托槽组总扣分及边缘嵴、咬合关系项目扣分较MBT托槽组多，差异均有统计学意义（t值分别为-2.302、4.196、2.523，均P < 0.05）。结论    DQ自锁托槽和MBT托槽均可达到良好的矫治效果，其中DQ自锁托槽可缩短矫治时间，但在边缘嵴、咬合关系及咬合接触方面略逊于MBT托槽。

关键词: ABO-OGS指数, Damon Q自锁托槽, MBT托槽

Abstract: Objective    To evaluate the orthodontic outcomes of Damon Q（DQ）self-ligating bracket system and MBT bracket system in the premolars extraction cases with ABO-OGS index. Mehtods    The clinical data of 60 patients with malocclusion，who were admitted to the Department of Orthodontics of Shanghai Ninth People′s Hospital from 2011 to 2019 and required premolar extraction for orthodontic treatment，were retrospectively analyzed. There were 30 patients with maxillary and mandibular first premolar extraction and 30 with maxillary first premolar and mandibular second premolar extraction. Patients with the same tooth extraction mode were divided into DQ self-ligating bracket group and MBT bracket group according to the orthodontic system，with 15 cases in each group. Therapeutic effect of two brackets systems was evaluated by ABO-OGS index. Results    The mean treatment duration in the MBT bracket group was（32.10 ± 7.26）months，and the mean treatment duration in the DQ self-ligating bracket group was（26.70 ± 4.53）months，which had statistically significant difference （t = 3.458，P < 0.05）. In the patients with maxillary and mandibular first premolars extraction，the total deduction in the MBT bracket group was lower than that in the DQ self-ligating bracket group，but there was no statistically significant difference （t = -0.297，P > 0.05）. More points were deducted for occlusal contact in the DQ self-ligating bracket group than in the MBT group，and the difference was statistically significant（t = 2.457，P < 0.05）. In the patients with maxillary first premolars and mandibular second premolars extraction，the total deduction in the DQ self-ligating bracket group was higher than that in the MBT group，and the deduction points of marginal ridges and occlusal relationships of the DQ self-ligating bracket group were more than that of the MBT bracket group，and there was statistically significant difference （the t values were -2.302，4.196 and 2.523，P < 0.05）. Conclusion    Both MBT bracket and DQ self-ligating bracket can achieve satisfactory clinical effect. DQ self-ligating bracket can shorten the treatment time，but it is slightly inferior to the MBT bracket in the aspects of marginal ridges，occlusal relationships and occlusal contacts.

Key words: ABO-OGS index, Damon Q self-ligating bracket, MBT bracket