Andrews六要素用于正畸病例数字化资料的临床回顾性研究

doi:10.7518/hxkq.2022.02.009

华西口腔医学杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (2): 183-188.doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2022.02.009

Andrews六要素用于正畸病例数字化资料的临床回顾性研究

刘超峰¹(), 许艳华², 易春艳³, 刘彦¹()

^1.昆明医科大学附属口腔医院第二门诊部，昆明 650000
^2.昆明医科大学附属口腔医院正畸科，昆明 650000
^3.昆明医科大学附属延安医院口腔科，昆明 650000

收稿日期:2021-06-15 修回日期:2022-01-10 出版日期:2022-04-01 发布日期:2022-04-01
通讯作者: 刘彦 E-mail:603218831@qq.com;18687162452@163.com
作者简介:刘超峰，住院医师，硕士，E-mail：603218831@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(81960195);云南省创新团队(202005AE160033);昆明医科大学科技创新团队(CXT-D2020xx);云南省大学生创新训练项目(202110678019)

Clinical retrospective study on the digital data of orthodontic cases by Andrews six elements

Liu Chaofeng¹(), Xu Yanhua², Yi Chunyan³, Liu Yan¹()

^1.Dept. of Second Outpatient, Kunming Medical University Affiliated Stomatological Hospital, Kunming 650000, China
^2.Dept. of Orthodontics, Kunming Medical University Affiliated Stomatological Hospital, Kunming 650000, China
^3.Dept. of Stomatology, Kunming Medical University Affiliated Yan’an Hospital, Kunming 650000, China

Received:2021-06-15 Revised:2022-01-10 Online:2022-04-01 Published:2022-04-01
Contact: Liu Yan E-mail:603218831@qq.com;18687162452@163.com
Supported by:
The National Natural Science Foundation of China(81960195);Innovation Team of Yunnan Province(202005AE160033);Science and Technology Innovation Team of Kunming Medical University(CXTD2020xx);University Students Innovation Training Project of Yunnan Province(202110678019);Correspondence: Liu Yan, E-mail: 18687162452@163.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的

使用Andrews六要素对正畸病例数字化资料进行测量分析，探讨不同性别、拔牙与否及不同矫治器对正畸治疗结果的影响。

方法

将2016—2020年经昆明医科大学口腔医院采用直丝弓矫治技术治疗完成的数字化病例资料作为总体，从中选取320例资料作为样本。将此320例资料分别按照性别、拔牙与否、矫治器类型（DamonQ自锁托槽与MBT托槽）进行分组，参照Andrews六要素测量标准进行测量计分。分别计算不同分组下各单项计分及总计分的均值、标准差，并进行统计学检验。

结果

男性与女性患者组间的Andrews六要素的总计分差异无统计学意义；在上牙弓宽度差异中，拔牙组与非拔牙组的计分差异有统计学意义；DamonQ自锁托槽组与MBT托槽组在上切牙前后位差异、下牙弓颊舌向差异及上牙弓宽度差异的计分均存在差异有统计学意义，而且DamonQ自锁托槽组在上切牙前后位差异、下牙弓颊舌向差异及上牙弓宽度差异的计分均值都小于MBT托槽组。

结论

数字化三维重建牙颌模型用于正畸结束病例临床回顾性研究，可重复测量，具有一定的临床应用价值。切牙前后位及上牙弓宽度对正畸结束病例的治疗效果影响最大，故在临床治疗中应加强对这两项指标的监控。性别不会对正畸总体疗效产生影响，但拔牙治疗可能会对正畸治疗结束病例的上牙弓宽度产生影响。DamonQ自锁托槽矫治器对牙弓颊舌向的调整有一定的优势。

关键词: Andrews六要素, 矫治病例, 数字化口腔模型, 回顾性研究

Abstract: Objective

Andrews six elements was used to explore the possible influences of gender, extraction/non-extraction, and different bracket types on the evaluation of orthodontic treatment outcome.

Methods

Digital data from 320 selected orthodontic cases in Kunming Medical University Affiliated Stomatological Hospital during the period of 2016—2020 were divided into groups in accordance with gender, tooth extraction, and type of orthodontic brackets (DamonQ self-ligating brackets and MBT brackets). Measurement was performed using Andrews six elements as standard. The mean and standard deviation of each individual score and total score for different groups were calculated and statistically tested.

Results

The differences in total scores between female and male cases exhibited no statistical significance (P>0.05). By contrast, the scores in skeletal width change of the maxilla between extraction cases and non-extraction cases presented statistical significance (P<0.05). Moreover, the scores in the anteroposterior change in the position of the maxillary incisors, the bucco-lingual border change of the mandibular arch, and the skeletal width change of the maxilla between the DamonQ self-ligating bracket and MBT bracket cases presented statistical significance (P<0.05). The cases with DamonQ self-ligating brackets had significantly lower scores than the cases with MBT brackets in the bucco-lingual border change of the mandibular arch, the skeletal width change of the maxilla, and the anteroposterior change in position of the maxillary incisors.

Conclusion

Digital 3D models can be used in the clinical retrospective studies of patients after orthodontic treatment. These models can be measured repeatedly and have clinical application value. For cases with incomplete orthodontic treatment, the control of the anteroposterior position of the incisor and the width of the arch of the upper tooth is crucial. Total treatment efficiency between female and male cases exhibited no difference, but the skeletal width change of the maxilla between extraction and non-extraction cases may exert an effect on cases with complete orthodontic treatment. The group that used DamonQ self-ligating brackets may achieve good adjustment of the bucco-lingual border change of the arch.

Key words: Andrews six elements, malocclusion cases, digital oral model, retrospective study

中图分类号:

R 783

刘超峰, 许艳华, 易春艳, 刘彦. Andrews六要素用于正畸病例数字化资料的临床回顾性研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2022, 40(2): 183-188.

Liu Chaofeng, Xu Yanhua, Yi Chunyan, Liu Yan. Clinical retrospective study on the digital data of orthodontic cases by Andrews six elements[J]. West China Journal of Stomatology, 2022, 40(2): 183-188.

图/表 6

表 1

表 2

表 3

表 4

表 5

表 6

参考文献 20

1	Jain M, Varghese J, Mascarenhas R, et al. Assessment of clinical outcomes of Roth and MBT bracket prescription using the American board of orthodontics objective grading system[J]. Contemp Clin Dent, 2013, 4(3): 307-312.
2	Weaver KE, Tremont TJ, Ngan P, et al. Changes in dental and basal archforms with preformed and customized archwires during orthodontic treatment[J]. Orthodont Wa-ves, 2012, 71(2): 45-50.
3	Song GY, Baumrind S, Zhao ZH, et al. Validation of the American board of orthodontics objective grading system for assessing the treatment outcomes of Chinese patients[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2013, 144(3): 391-397.
4	Chaison ET, Liu X, Tuncay OC. The quality of treatment in the adult orthodontic patient as judged by orthodontists and measured by the Objective Grading System[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2011, 139(4 ): S69-S75.
5	Mennito AS, Evans ZP, Lauer AW, et al. Evaluation of the effect scan pattern has on the trueness and precision of six intraoral digital impression systems[J]. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2018, 30(2): 113-118.
6	Cuperus AMR, Harms MC, Rangel FA, et al. Dental models made with an intraoral scanner: a validation study[J]. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthoped, 2012, 142(3): 308-313.
7	杨瑾廷, 韩向龙, 白丁. 数字化三维诊疗技术在口腔正畸学中的应用[J]. 国际口腔医学杂志, 2015, 42(4): 446-449.
	Yang JT, Han XL, Bai D. Digital three-dimensional diagnosis and treatment techniques in orthodontics[J]. Int J Stomatol, 2015, 42(4): 446-449.
8	Mack S, Bonilla T, English JD, et al. Accuracy of 3-dimensional curvilinear measurements on digital models with intraoral scanners[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2017, 152(3): 420-425.
9	Su TS, Sun J. Intraoral digital impression technique: a review[J]. J Prosthodont, 2015, 24(4): 313-321.
10	李彬, 段沛沛, 白丁. 数字化技术在口腔正畸诊疗中的应用[J]. 口腔医学, 2021, 41(1): 71-75.
	Li B, Duan PP, Bai D. Application of digital technology in diagnosis and treatment of orthodontics[J]. Stomatology, 2021, 41(1): 71-75.
11	Rossini G, Parrini S, Castroflorio T, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and measurement sensitivity of digital models for orthodontic purposes: a systematic review[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2016, 149(2): 161-170.
12	Andrews LF, Andrews WA. The six elements of orofacial harmony[J]. Andrews J, 2000, 1(1): 13-22.
13	Resnick CM, Kim S, Yorlets RR, et al. Evaluation of Andrewsanalysis as a predictor of ideal sagittal maxillary positioning in orthognathic surgery[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2018, 76(10): 2169-2176.
14	de Fátima Conti M, Vedovello Filho M, Amélia Scudeler Vedovello S, et al. Longitudinal evaluation of dental arches individualized by the WALA ridge method[J]. Dent Press J Orthod, 2011, 16(2): 65-74.
15	Proffit WR, White RP Jr. Who needs surgical-orthodontic treatment[J]. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg, 1990, 5(2): 81-99.
16	Jeyaraj P, Chakranarayan A. Rationale, relevance, and efficacy of “surgery first, orthodontics later” approach in the management of cases of severe malocclusion with skeletal discrepancy[J]. Ann Maxillofac Surg, 2019, 9(1): 57-71.
17	McKinney JR, Harris EF. Influence of patient age and sex on orthodontic treatment: evaluations of Begg lightwire, standard edgewise, and straightwire techniques[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2001, 120(5): 530-541.
18	Mandall NA, Matthew S, Fox D, et al. Prediction of compliance and completion of orthodontic treatment: are quality of life measures important[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2008, 30(1): 40-45.
19	Kirschneck C, Proff P, Reicheneder C, et al. Short-term effects of systematic premolar extraction on lip profile, vertical dimension and cephalometric parameters in borderline patients for extraction therapy: a retrospective cohort study[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2016, 20(4): 865-874.
20	Xu TM, Liu Y, Yang MZ, et al. Comparison of extraction versus nonextraction orthodontic treatment outcomes for borderline Chinese patients[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofaci Orthop, 2006, 129(5): 672-677.

组别	病例数	百分比/%	性别
组别	病例数	百分比/%	男	女
矫治类型
拔牙	160	50.00	36	124
非拔牙	160	50.00	56	104
托槽设计类型
DamonQ	154	48.10	48	106
MBT	166	51.90	44	122

组别		病例数	均值	标准差	F值	P值	t值	P值
上颌	男	92	2.60	1.38	0.049	0.825	0.185*	0.854*
	女	228	2.51	1.33	0.049	0.825	0.185*	0.854*
下颌	男	92	2.18	1.56	0.045	0.834	-0.425*	0.673*
	女	228	2.39	1.37	0.045	0.834	-0.425*	0.673*

组别		病例数	均值	标准差	F值	P值	t值	P值
上颌	拔牙	160	2.49	1.26	0.555	0.461	-0.230	0.819
	非拔牙	160	2.59	1.41	0.555	0.461	-0.230	0.819
下颌	拔牙	160	2.47	1.43	0.025	0.874	0.613	0.544
	非拔牙	160	2.20	1.40	0.025	0.874	0.613	0.544

ICD测量指标		拔牙组	非拔牙组	t值	P值
牙弓核心线差异	上颌	0.24±0.15	0.26±0.22	-0.138	0.891
牙弓核心线差异	下颌	0.35±0.14	0.19±0.15	1.623	0.113
切牙前后位差异	上颌	3.33±1.46	3.26±1.34	0.169	0.867
切牙前后位差异	下颌	1.57±1.23	1.53±0.83	0.121	0.905
Spee曲线深度	上颌	0.51±0.37	0.64±0.48	-0.838	0.407
Spee曲线深度	下颌	0.90±0.60	0.85±0.40	0.311	0.758
牙弓颊舌向差异	上颌	1.34±0.49	1.44±0.44	-0.729	0.470
牙弓颊舌向差异	下颌	1.47±0.75	1.21±0.75	1.095	0.281
上牙弓宽度差异		1.59±0.84	2.27±1.22	-2.041	0.048
牙弓内其他间隙变化	上颌	0.88±0.79	1.21±1.12	-1.585	0.121
牙弓内其他间隙变化	下颌	0.85±0.53	1.14±0.82	-1.296	0.203

组别		病例数	均值	标准差	F值	P值	t值	P值
上颌	DamonQ	154	2.40	1.30	0.044	0.836	-0.602	0.551
	MBT	166	2.66	1.36	0.044	0.836	-0.602	0.551
下颌	DamonQ	154	1.87	1.16	1.919	0.174	-2.065	0.046
	MBT	166	2.75	1.51	1.919	0.174	-2.065	0.046

Andrews六要素用于正畸病例数字化资料的临床回顾性研究

Clinical retrospective study on the digital data of orthodontic cases by Andrews six elements

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 20

相关文章 7

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

ICD测量指标		DamonQ组	MBT组	t值	P值
牙弓核心线差异	上颌	0.30±0.20	0.20±0.17	0.930	0.358
牙弓核心线差异	下颌	0.25±0.15	0.29±0.17	-0.388	0.700
切牙前后位差异	上颌	2.51±1.05	4.00±1.29	-3.988	0.000
切牙前后位差异	下颌	1.41±0.89	1.67±1.16	-0.777	0.442
Spee曲线深度	上颌	0.39±0.36	0.54±0.29	-0.857	0.397
Spee曲线深度	下颌	1.03±0.46	0.74±0.52	1.866	0.070
牙弓颊舌向差异	上颌	1.41±0.53	1.37±0.40	0.212	0.833
牙弓颊舌向差异	下颌	0.88±0.36	1.74±0.79	-4.352	0.000
上牙弓宽度差异		1.60±0.86	2.29±1.21	2.087	0.044
牙弓内其他间隙变化	上颌	1.07±0.86	1.02±0.92	0.158	0.875
牙弓内其他间隙变化	下颌	1.06±0.75	0.93±0.65	0.573	0.570

[1]	陈益燕, Pradan Siras Prasad, 杨锦波. 302例显微根尖手术的回顾性研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2021, 39(4): 458-463.
[2]	刘超峰, 许艳华, 刘彦. 应用Andrews六要素对矫治结束病例的疗效评价研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2021, 39(1): 48-52.
[3]	龚玉萍,李锐,王颖,康鹏,蔡菁华,刘一鸣,甘抗. 198例老年颌面部骨折患者临床分析[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2018, 36(6): 671-674.
[4]	乔永明, 刘一鸣, 李锐, 龚建民, 何巍. 颞下颌关节脱位手术治疗的回顾性研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2018, 36(3): 262-266.
[5]	刘琰, 曹鸣芯, 吴家顺, 高晓磊, 梁新华. 人乳头瘤病毒相关头颈肿瘤的中文文献研究现状分析[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2017, 35(3): 301-310.
[6]	刘济远1，2 袁蒙姜3 韩波2 唐休发2. 18例慢性舌下腺炎病例回顾性研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2012, 30(4): 380-382.
[7]	郭小玲;魏奉才;孙善珍. 多原发恶性肿瘤合并口腔病变的临床研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2006, 24(01): 42-44.