牵引钩可隐藏式球形颊面管与方形颊面管的临床性能对比研究

doi:10.7518/hxkq.2025.2025378

华西口腔医学杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (1): 48-53.doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2025.2025378

• 口腔正畸学诊疗新进展 • 上一篇下一篇

牵引钩可隐藏式球形颊面管与方形颊面管的临床性能对比研究

李思朗¹(), 张玲¹, 崔孟雅¹, 钟庭进², 陈子炀², 宋文璐², 韩玉², 吉利¹()

^1.中山大学附属第一医院口腔科，广州 510062
^2.广东省口腔正畸工程技术研究中心，广州 510080

收稿日期:2025-09-16 出版日期:2026-02-01 发布日期:2026-02-02
通讯作者: 吉利 E-mail:16620529639@163.com;orthodentist_jili@163.com
作者简介:李思朗，主治医师，硕士，E-mail：16620529639@163.com
基金资助:
产学合作协同育人项目(220901316063638);产学合作协同育人项目(22080131-6245152);产学合作协同育人项目(240701316220512)

Comparative study on the clinical performance of concealable traction hook spherical buccal tubes versus conventional rectangular buccal tubes

Li Silang¹(), Zhang Ling¹, Cui Mengya¹, Zhong Tingjin², Chen Ziyang², Song Wenlu², Han Yu², Ji Li¹()

^1.Dept. of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510062, China
^2.Guangdong Provincial Engineering Research Center of Oral Orthodontics, Guangzhou 510080, China

Received:2025-09-16 Online:2026-02-01 Published:2026-02-02
Contact: Ji Li E-mail:16620529639@163.com;orthodentist_jili@163.com
Supported by:
the University-Industry Collaborative Education Program(220901316063638)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的综合比较牵引钩可隐藏式球形颊面管（球隐颊面管）与方形颊面管在患者舒适度、颊部黏膜损伤发生率、牙周健康指数及临床脱落率等方面的差异，为临床应用提供依据。方法纳入30例受试者，采用分口设计，将受试者口腔两侧随机分配，分别粘接方形颊面管（A组）与球隐颊面管（B组）。收集并记录矫治过程中2组患者的疼痛评分、溃疡情况和第一磨牙颊面管的脱落情况，并评估2组患者矫治前（T0）、颊面管粘接30 d（T1）时第一磨牙的菌斑指数（PLI）、牙龈指数（GI）及龈沟出血指数（SBI）。结果 A组疼痛评分显著高于B组（Z=-5.231，P<0.001），86.7%患者报告中度及以上疼痛，而B组90.0%为轻度疼痛。A组溃疡发生率（76.7%）显著高于B组（3.3%）（Z=-4.508，P<0.001）。治疗后2组牙周指数均较治疗前显著增加（P<0.05），但A组PLI、GI、SBI的增长幅度均显著大于B组（P<0.001）。A组颊面管脱落率（26.7%）显著高于B组（8.3%）（P<0.001）。结论球隐颊面管在提升患者舒适度、降低黏膜损伤发生率和临床脱落率及维护牙周健康等方面的临床性能均显著优于传统方形颊面管，能为患者提供更为舒适且健康的正畸治疗体验。

关键词: 球形颊面管, 方形颊面管, 舒适度, 牙周健康, 脱落率

Abstract:

Objective This study comprehensively compares the differences between concealable traction hook spherical buccal tubes (concealable spherical tubes) and conventional rectangular buccal tubes in terms of patient comfort, incidence of buccal mucosal injury, periodontal health indices, and clinical bond failure rate to provide evidence for clinical application. Methods Thirty subjects were enrolled and treated using a split-mouth design, where the two sides of each patient’s oral cavity were randomly assigned to receive either conventional rectangular buccal tubes (group A) or concealable spherical buccal tubes (group B). During treatment, pain scores, ulcer occurrence, and bond failure of the first molar buccal tubes were recorded. Periodontal indices, including plaque index (PLI), gingival index (GI), and sulcus bleeding index (SBI) of the first molars, were assessed before treatment (T0) and 30 days after tube bonding (T1). Results The pain scores in group A were significantly higher than those in group B (Z=-5.231, P<0.001). Moderate or higher pain was reported by 86.7% of patients in group A, whereas 90.0% of patients in group B reported mild pain only. The incidence of ulcers in group A (76.7%) was significantly higher than that in group B (3.3%, Z=-4.508, P<0.001). After treatment, the periodontal indices in both groups increased significantly compared to pre-treatment levels (P<0.05); however, the increases in PLI, GI, and SBI were significantly greater in group A than in group B (P<0.001). The bond failure rate in group A (26.7%) was significantly higher than that in group B (8.3%, P<0.001). Conclusion The clinical performance of concealable spherical buccal tubes is significantly superior to that of conventional rectangular buccal tubes in improving patient comfort, reducing the incidence of mucosal injury and clinical bond failure, and maintaining periodontal health. This design offers patients a more comfortable and healthier orthodontic treatment experience.

Key words: spherical buccal tube, rectangular buccal tube, comfort, periodontal health, bond failure rate

中图分类号:

R783.5

李思朗, 张玲, 崔孟雅, 钟庭进, 陈子炀, 宋文璐, 韩玉, 吉利. 牵引钩可隐藏式球形颊面管与方形颊面管的临床性能对比研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2026, 44(1): 48-53.

Li Silang, Zhang Ling, Cui Mengya, Zhong Tingjin, Chen Ziyang, Song Wenlu, Han Yu, Ji Li. Comparative study on the clinical performance of concealable traction hook spherical buccal tubes versus conventional rectangular buccal tubes[J]. West China Journal of Stomatology, 2026, 44(1): 48-53.

图/表 2

参考文献 22

[1]	卢艳萍, 陈斌, 马玲, 等. 粘接式颊面管与带环颊面管对牙周健康影响的观察[J]. 中国城乡企业卫生, 2020(8): 172-174.
	Lu YP, Chen B, Ma L, et al. Observation of periodontal health influence of using bonding type and ring band type buccal[J]. Chin J Urban Rural Enterp Hyg, 2020(8): 172-174.
[2]	Chang J, Li X. Multivariate analysis of oral mucosal ulcers during orthodontic treatment[J]. World J Clin Ca-ses, 2024, 12(26): 5868-5876.
[3]	Manuelli M, Marcolina M, Nardi N, et al. Oral mucosal complications in orthodontic treatment[J]. Minerva Stomatol, 2019, 68(2): 84-88.
[4]	Buyukcavus E, Ugurlu M, Buyukcavus MH. Shear bond strength of orthodontic molar tubes to composite restoration bonded with particular adhesives after different surface pre-treatments[J]. Orthod Craniofac Res, 2022, 25(4): 541-548.
[5]	Hussein S, Ismail H. Influence of reminder on enhan-cing compliance in patients with fixed orthodontic app-liance treatment (a randomized controlled clinical trial) [J]. Patient Prefer Adherence, 2023, 17: 1759-1769.
[6]	Sew Hoy W, Antoun J, Lin W, et al. Ecological momentary assessment of pain in adolescents undergoing or-thodontic treatment using a smartphone app[J]. Semin Orthod, 2018, 24(2): 209-216.
[7]	Pedersen AML, Bukkehave KH, Bennett EP, et al. Effect of lozenges containing Lactobacillus reuteri on the severity of recurrent aphthous ulcers: a pilot study[J]. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins, 2020, 12(3): 819-823.
[8]	Kim JM, Yoo SY, An JS, et al. Effect of a multichannel oral irrigator on periodontal health and the oral microbiome[J]. Sci Rep, 2023, 13(1): 12043.
[9]	Guo L, Feng Y, Guo HG, et al. Consequences of ortho-dontic treatment in malocclusion patients: clinical and microbial effects in adults and children[J]. BMC Oral Health, 2016, 16(1): 112.
[10]	贺红, 吉利. 浅谈正畸临床矫治新技术—球托止动定位轻力5s系统[J]. 国际口腔医学杂志, 2024, 51(2): 125-136.
	He H, Ji L. Discussion of an innovating orthodontic te-chnique: a spherical bracket, lock-hook and light force treatment system[J]. Int J Stomatol, 2024, 51(2): 125-136.
[11]	Volovic J, Badirli S, Ahmad S, et al. A novel machine learning model for predicting orthodontic treatment duration[J]. Diagnostics (Basel), 2023, 13(17): 2740.
[12]	李英, 王胜国. 固定正畸期间创伤性口腔溃疡的防治研究进展[J]. 现代医药卫生, 2023, 39(6): 1024-1028.
	Li Y, Wang SG. Research progress on prevention and treatment of traumatic oral ulcer during fixed orthodontics[J]. J Mod Med Health, 2023, 39(6): 1024-1028.
[13]	Jepsen K, Sculean A, Jepsen S. Complications and treatment errors involving periodontal tissues related to orthodontic therapy[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2023, 92(1): 135-158.
[14]	Tu KW, Kuo CH, Hung CC, et al. Strategic sequencing of orthodontic treatment and periodontal regenerative surgery: a literature review[J]. J Dent Sci, 2025, 20(3): 1391-1397.
[15]	Huser MC, Baehni PC, Lang R. Effects of orthodontic bands on microbiologic and clinical parameters[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1990, 97(3): 213-218.
[16]	Kim JE, Kim S, Kim DH. Comparison of oral health status, oral hygiene management behaviours and satisfaction of patients with fixed orthodontic appliance and clear aligner: a quasi-experimental design[J]. Int J Dent Hyg, 2024, 22(4): 939-948.
[17]	郭龙妹, 吉利, 张玲, 等. 球面和方形自锁托槽对牙周指数及龈沟液炎性因子的影响[J]. 医药论坛杂志, 2022, 43(9): 1-6, 10.
	Guo LM, Ji L, Zhang L, et al. Effects of spherical self-ligating bracket and square self-ligating bracket on pe-riodontal indices and inflammatory cytokine levels[J]. J Med Forum, 2022, 43(9): 1-6, 10.
[18]	Öncel NA, Ulusoy N, Ulusoy C. Comparison of shear bond strength and residual adhesive remnants on the ena-mel surface after debonding of three different orthodontic molar tubes: a scanning electron microscope study[J]. J Orofac Orthop, 2024, 85(): 94-101.
[19]	杨瑞婷, 张洁, 许雅芬, 等. 金属托槽粘接性能及脱落率相关影响因素的研究进展[J]. 现代口腔医学杂志, 2025, 39(3): 250-253, 209.
	Yang RT, Zhang J, Xu YF, et al. Research progress on factors influencing the bonding performance and debon-ding rate of metal brackets[J]. J Modern Stomatol, 2025, 39(3): 250-253, 209.
[20]	Knaup I, Schulte U, Bartz JR, et al. Post-treatment stabi-lity in orthodontic retention with Twistflex retainers-Do patients benefit from additional removable retainers[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2022, 26(8): 5215-5222.
[21]	Hardalupas Y, Taylor AMKP, Wilkins JH. Experimental investigation of sub-millimetre droplet impingement on to spherical surfaces[J]. Int J Heat Fluid Flow, 1999, 20(5): 477-485.
[22]	Ma X, Jiang C, Zhang J, et al. Finite element analysis of the impact of different traction anchorage locations on maxillary molar distalization with clear aligners and implant screws[J]. BMC Oral Health, 2025, 25(1): 1327.

牙周指数	组别	T0	T1	P₁值	T1-T0	P₂值
PLI	A	0.22±0.41	1.82±0.39	<0.000 1	1.60±0.39	<0.000 1
	B	0.23±0.15	1.21±0.41	<0.000 1	0.98±0.29	<0.000 1
GI	A	0.35±0.48	1.51±0.50	<0.000 1	1.16±0.49	<0.000 1
	B	0.35±0.48	1.13±0.34	<0.000 1	0.78±0.39	<0.000 1
SBI	A	0.98±0.13	2.90±0.30	<0.000 1	1.92±0.27	<0.000 1
	B	1.02±0.46	2.40±0.49	<0.000 1	1.38±0.49	<0.000 1

牵引钩可隐藏式球形颊面管与方形颊面管的临床性能对比研究

Comparative study on the clinical performance of concealable traction hook spherical buccal tubes versus conventional rectangular buccal tubes

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 2

参考文献 22

相关文章 4

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	杨丽媛, 刘冠邑, 赵凌, 高旭. 3种方法确定水平颌位关系的全口义齿准确性比较[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2020, 38(4): 404-409.
[2]	程远吴冷赵蕾. 龈沟产线菌检出率与牙周健康状况的相关性分析[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2016, 34(1): 41-46.
[3]	常宇红李凤兰. 肯氏I类缺失不同大连接体对语音和舒适度的影响[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2013, 31(2): 158-160.
[4]	董文亮马敏段志斌王兵韩春华黄永清. 宁夏地区2 628名成年人牙周健康状况的研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2011, 29(06): 618-621.