口腔医学研究

口腔医学研究 ›› 2018, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (3): 286-289.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2018.03.018

• 颞下颌关节研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

成人AngleⅠ、AngleⅡ1和AngleⅡ2类错牙合畸形髁突形态和位置的CBCT对比研究

陆兴龙1, 杨建浩1, 张志伟2, 刘一鹏3, 张月兰1*, 蔡留意4*   

  1. 1. 郑州大学第一附属医院口腔正畸科 河南 郑州 450052;
    2. 郑州大学第二附属医院口腔科 河南 郑州 450014;
    3. 郑州大学第一附属医院口腔颌面外科 河南 郑州 450052;
    4. 武警河南省总队医院口腔科 河南 郑州 450052
  • 收稿日期:2018-01-20 出版日期:2018-03-30 发布日期:2018-03-27
  • 通讯作者: *张月兰,E-mail:1259837940@qq.com;蔡留意,E-mail:daniel5363@163.com
  • 作者简介:陆兴龙(1990~ ),男,安徽六安人,硕士在读,执业医师,研究方向为口腔正畸学。
  • 基金资助:
    河南省卫生厅重点项目(编号:201502014);河南省教育厅科技攻关项目(编号:15A320087)

Comparison of Condylar Morphology and Position between Angle Class Ⅰ and Class Ⅱ Malocclusion in Adults.

LU Xing-long1, YANG Jian-hao1, WANG Yi-peng1, ZHANG Zhi-wei2, CHEN Chang1, ZHANG Yue-lan1*, CAI Liu-yi3*   

  1. 1. Department of Orthodontics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University; Zhengzhou, 450052, China;
    2. Department of Stomatology, The Second Affiliated of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450014, China;
    3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University,Zhengzhou,450052,China;
    4. Department of Stomatology, Armed Police Corps Hospital of Henan, Zhengzhou, 450052, China
  • Received:2018-01-20 Online:2018-03-30 Published:2018-03-27

PDF (PC)

373

摘要： 目的: 应用CBCT对无主观关节症状的成人AngleⅠ类、AngleⅡ1类和AngleⅡ2类错牙合畸形患者的髁突形态位置进行对比观察研究。方法: 选择AngleⅠ类、AngleⅡ1类和AngleⅡ2类错牙合畸形患者各19例行CBCT扫描,应用CBCT专用软件Invivo 5.0分析测量颞下颌关节前间隙、上间隙、后间隙、颞下颌关节窝的深度、髁突最大近远中径和最大内外径等相关参数,并运用SPSS 21.0软件包对3组数据进行统计学分析,比较AngleⅠ类、AngleⅡ1类和AngleⅡ2类错牙合畸形患者的髁突形态位置差异。结果: AJS(mm)在AngleⅠ类组与AngleⅡ1类组间和AngleⅠ类组与AngleⅡ2类组间差异有统计学意义;PJS(mm)在3组中两两组间差异均有统计学意义;DMF(mm)在AngleⅠ类组与AngleⅡ1类组间和AngleⅠ类组与AngleⅡ2类组间差异均有统计学意义;MD(mm)在AngleⅠ类组与AngleⅡ1类组间差异有统计学意义。髁突在关节窝的位置AngleⅠ类组主要表现居中位,占50%;AngleⅡ1类组和AngleⅡ2类组主要表现为髁突后移位,分别占55%、84%。结论: AngleⅡ1类和AngleⅡ2类错牙合畸形的颞下颌关节前间隙大于AngleⅠ类;AngleⅡ2类错牙合畸形的颞下颌关节后间隙小于AngleⅡ1类,AngleⅡ1类错牙合畸形的颞下颌关节后间隙小于AngleⅠ类;AngleⅡ类错牙合畸形的颞下颌关节后移位。

关键词: 错牙合畸形, 髁突形态和位置, CBCT

Abstract: Objective: To analyze and compare the difference of condylar morphology and position between Angle Class Ⅰ and Class Ⅱ malocclusion patients using cone-beam CT (CBCT). Methods: Nineteen ClassⅠ adults, 19 Class Ⅱ division 1 adults and 19 Class Ⅱ division 2 adults were selected in this study. Each patient underwent CBCT. The images in the oblique position perpendicular to the condyloid process were reconstructed by Invivo 5.0 (through Exam Vision software). The condylar morphology and position were measured by Invivio 5.0. The data were processed with SPSS 21.0 software package. Results: There were significant differences in the anterior joint space, in the posterior joint space, and in the depth of glenoid fossa among different malocclusion patients. The length of condyle were significant different between Class Ⅰ and Class Ⅱ division 1. Fifty percent of the condylloid process in Class Ⅰ was in the middle place. Fifty-five percent in Class Ⅱ division 1 and 84% in Class Ⅱ division 2 of the condylloid were in the posterior space. Conclusion: The anterior joint space is larger in Class Ⅱ than Class Ⅰ. The posterior joint space is the lowest in Class Ⅱ division 2 among three malocclusions. The condylloid is in the posterior space in Class Ⅱ.

Key words: Malocclusion, Condylar morphology and position, CBCT