口腔医学研究

口腔医学研究 ›› 2018, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (6): 636-639.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2018.06.015

• 口腔唇腭裂病研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于锥形束CT的单侧完全性唇腭裂患者上前牙牙槽骨厚度及高度的研究

杨佳鑫1, 王建国2*, 张锡忠2, 魏志强2   

  1. 1. 南开大学医学院 天津 300071;
    2. 南开大学附属口腔医院 天津市口腔医院正畸科 天津 300041
  • 收稿日期:2017-12-07 出版日期:2018-06-20 发布日期:2018-06-21
  • 通讯作者: 王建国,E-mail:wangjianguocn@hotmail.com
  • 作者简介:杨佳鑫(1990~ ),女,河北人,硕士在读,主要从事 口腔正畸学研究工作。

Assessment of Alveolar Bone Thickness and Height surrounding Maxillary Anterior Teeth in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Cone-beam Computed Tomography Study

YANG Jia-xin1, WANG Jian-guo2*, ZHANG Xi-zhong2, WEI Zhi-qiang2   

  1. 1. Medical College of Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China;
    2. Department of Orthodontic, Tianjin Stomatological Hospital, Tianjin 300041, China
  • Received:2017-12-07 Online:2018-06-20 Published:2018-06-21

PDF (PC)

223

摘要： 目的:采用锥形束CT(CBCT )对单侧完全性唇腭裂(UCLP)患者上前牙区牙槽骨的厚度及高度进行评估,比较裂隙侧与非裂隙侧的差异。方法:对30例单侧完全性唇腭裂患者进行CBCT扫描,应用Invivo测量软件,将裂隙侧与非裂隙侧中切牙及尖牙作为研究对象,测量其唇、腭侧牙槽骨在釉牙骨质界根方3 mm、6 mm和根尖点冠方1 mm处的牙槽骨厚度,及唇、腭侧牙槽嵴顶点(AC)与釉牙骨质界点(CEJ)之间的距离,作为牙槽骨高度的衡量标准(AC-CEJ)。将裂隙侧与非裂隙侧的测量数据进行配对t检验。结果:裂隙侧与非裂隙侧的中切牙唇、腭侧牙槽骨厚度,在釉牙骨质界根方3 mm和6 mm水平处的差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),非裂隙侧牙槽骨厚度大于裂隙侧。而尖牙唇、腭侧牙槽骨厚度的差异无统计学意义。双侧中切牙、尖牙AC-CEJ距离在唇侧的差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),裂隙侧距离大于非裂隙侧,而在腭侧二者差异无统计学意义。结论:对于单侧完全性唇腭裂患者,裂隙侧前牙牙槽骨厚度和高度均受到裂隙的影响,正畸治疗前应拍摄CBCT对其牙槽骨进行准确评估。

关键词: 单侧完全性唇腭裂, 牙槽骨, 锥形束CT

Abstract: Objective: To study the alveolar bone thickness and height of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: The CBCT scans of 30 patients with UCLP were assessed. The thickness and height of alveolar bone surrounding the maxillary central incisors and canines were measured using the software Invivo. For each tooth analyzed, the thickness of the buccal and palate bone level at 3mm, 6mm, and 1mm were measured. Meanwhile, we measured the distance between the bone crest (AC) and the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) at the buccal and palate side. A paired t-test was performed to compare bone thickness and AC-CEJ distance at the cleft and non-cleft side of the central incisors and canines. Results: For central incisors, the thickness of the buccal and palate bone level at 3mm and 6mm had statistical difference between the cleft side and non-cleft side (P<0.05). The thickness of alveolar bone at the non-cleft side was larger than that at the cleft side. But for canines, the thickness of the buccal and palate bone had no statistical difference between the cleft side and non-cleft side. For both central incisors and canines, the AC-CEJ distance of the buccal bone had statistical difference between the cleft side and non-cleft side (P<0.05). The AC-CEJ distance at the cleft side was larger than that at the non-cleft side. The AC-CEJ distance of the palate bone had no statistical difference between the cleft side and non-cleft side. Conclusion: For UCLP, the teeth alveolar bone loss and thickness are both in relation to the existence of cleft. It is necessary to accurately assess the alveolar bone by CBCT before orthodontic treatment.

Key words: Unilateral cleft lip and palate, Teeth alveolar bone, Cone-beam computed tomography