华西口腔医学杂志 ›› 2020, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (1): 69-74.doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2020.01.012

• 系统评价专栏 • 上一篇    下一篇

骨支抗装置与上颌面具前牵引装置治疗青少年骨性Ⅲ类错颌畸形疗效比较的Meta分析

石慧1,葛红珊1,陈露祎2,李志华1()   

  1. 1. 南昌大学附属口腔医院正畸科 江西省口腔生物医学重点实验室,南昌 330006
    2. 深圳市口腔医院口腔内科,深圳 518000
  • 收稿日期:2019-05-21 修回日期:2019-07-19 出版日期:2020-02-01 发布日期:2020-02-06
  • 通讯作者: 李志华 E-mail:lwlq323@163.com
  • 作者简介:石慧,主治医师,硕士,E-mail: amyhuishi@163.com

Meta-analysis of the efficacy of bone anchorage and maxillary facemask protraction devices in treating skeletal class Ⅲ malocclusion in adolescents

Shi Hui1,Ge Hongshan1,Chen Luyi2,Li Zhihua1()   

  1. 1. Dept. of Orthodontics, Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Nanchang University, Jiangxi Key Laboratory of Stomatology and Biomedicine, Nanchang 330006, China
    2. Dept. of Oral Medicine, Shenzhen Stomatological Hospital, Shenzhen 518000, China
  • Received:2019-05-21 Revised:2019-07-19 Online:2020-02-01 Published:2020-02-06
  • Contact: Zhihua Li E-mail:lwlq323@163.com

摘要:

目的 对骨支抗装置与上颌面具前牵引装置治疗青少年骨性Ⅲ类错颌畸形的临床效果进行系统评价。方法 检索Cochrane Library、PubMed、EmBase、CNKI、万方等数据库,查找种植支抗装置与上颌面具前牵引装置治疗青少年骨性Ⅲ类错颌临床效果的文献,对文献进行筛选、提取资料及质量评价。应用RevMan 5.3软件进行统计,对2种方法治疗前后SNA、SNB、ANB、ANS-Me、Wits和U1-PP的变化值进行Meta分析。结果 研究最终纳入7篇文献,其中3篇随机对照试验,4篇非随机对照试验,共纳入264例患者。Meta分析结果显示,骨支抗治疗组较上颌面具前牵引组SNA变化值增加,ANS-Me、Wits、U1-PP变化值减小(P<0.05),SNB、ANB变化值2组之间无统计学差异。结论 骨支抗装置与上颌面具前牵引装置治疗青少年骨性Ⅲ类错颌相比,可以增加上颌骨的前移量,并较好地控制上颌前牙的唇倾度,但结果仍然需要更多的高质量随机对照试验进行验证。

关键词: 骨支抗, 前牵引, 青少年, 骨性Ⅲ类错颌, Meta分析

Abstract:

Objective To assess the efficacy of bone anchorage and maxillary facemask protraction devices in treating skeletal class Ⅲ malocclusion in adolescents. Methods Articles relating to the use of bone anchorage and maxillary facemask protraction devices for treating skeletal class Ⅲ malocclusion in adolescents were searched from the databases of Cochrane Library, PubMed, EmBase, CNKI, and Wanfang database. Several inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed for the article screening. The clinical data were extracted, and the quality of the selected articles was evaluated. A Meta-analysis of SNA, SNB, ANB, ANS-Me, Wits, and U1-PP change was performed by using RevMan 5.3. Results Seven studies (264 patients) were included in the Meta-analysis. Among these studies, three were randomized controlled trials, and four were non-randomized controlled trials. Compared with the maxillary facemask protraction device group, the bone anchorage device group had higher SNA changes and lower ANS-Me, Wits, and U1-PP changes (P<0.05). No significant differences were observed in the SNB and ANB changes between these two groups. Conclusion Compared with the maxillary facemask protraction device, the bone anchorage device can increase the extent of protraction of the maxilla and has better controls for the labial inclination of the maxillary anterior teeth in treating skeletal class Ⅲ malocclusion among adolescents. However, additional high-quality randomized controlled trials must be performed to verify the results.

Key words: bone anchorage, protraction, adolescents, skeletal class Ⅲ malocclusion, Meta-analysis

中图分类号: