不同牙周表型对微种植支抗钉稳定性的影响

doi:10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2023.02.007

口腔医学研究 ›› 2023, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (2): 124-128.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2023.02.007

不同牙周表型对微种植支抗钉稳定性的影响

李浩杰^1,2, 陈学鹏³, 钟佳永^1,2*

1 蚌埠医学院口腔医学院安徽蚌埠 233030;
2.嘉兴市第一医院嘉兴学院附属医院浙江嘉兴 314000;
3.浙江大学医学院附属口腔医院·浙江大学口腔医学院·浙江省口腔疾病临床医学研究中心·浙江省口腔生物医学研究重点实验室·浙江大学癌症研究院浙江杭州 310006

收稿日期:2022-08-22 出版日期:2023-02-28 发布日期:2023-02-20
通讯作者: * 钟佳永,E-mail:zjydoc@163.com
作者简介:李浩杰(1995~ ),女,安徽人,硕士在读,住院医师,主要从事口腔正畸临床研究。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(编号:81400511)

Impact of Different Periodontal Phenotypes on Stability of Mini-implants

LI Haojie^1,3, CHEN Xuepeng², ZHONG Jiayong^1,3*

1. School of Stomatology, Bengbu Medical University, Bengbu 233030, China;
2. The First Hospital of Jiaxing, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing 314000, Chin;
3. Stomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310006, China

Received:2022-08-22 Online:2023-02-28 Published:2023-02-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的: 探讨不同牙周表型对正畸微种植支抗钉稳定性的影响。方法: 筛选100例骨性Ⅱ类错牙合年轻女性患者,其中薄龈型50例,厚龈型50例,以上患者均拔除上颌双侧第一前磨牙,并在上颌第二前磨牙和第一磨牙之间植入微种植钉加强支抗,即刻加力,力值200 g,记录6个月后两组菌斑指数(PLI)、龈沟出血指数(SBI)、探诊深度(PD)以及成功例数并进行对比分析。结果: 薄龈型组微种植支抗钉PLI、SBI、PD以及微种植钉周围炎发生率均高于厚龈型组(P＜0.05),微种植支抗钉稳定性显著低于厚龈型组(P＜0.05)。结论: 牙周表型是影响正畸微种植钉稳定性的重要因素,薄龈型者稳定性显著低于厚龈型者,此结果可用来指导正畸医生临床实践。

关键词: 微种植钉, 牙周表型, 稳定性, 支抗

Abstract: Objective: To investigate the effect of different periodontal phenotypes on the stability of orthodontic mini-implants. Methods: One hundred young female patients with skeletal class Ⅱ malocclusion were selected, including 50 cases of thin phenotype and 50 cases of thick phenotype. These patients were extracted 2 first premolars and implanted mini-implants between the second premolar and the first molar in the maxilla, both were loaded with 200g immediately. Plaque index(PLI), sulcus bleeding index(SBI), probing depth(PD), and the number of successful cases of two groups were compared and analyzed. Results: The values of related indexes and the incidence of peri-implantitis in thin phenotype group were significantly higher than those in the thick group (P＜0.05), and the stability of thin phenotype was significantly lower than that in the thick phenotype group (P＜0.05). Conclusion: Periodontal phenotype is an important factor affecting the stability of orthodontic mini-implants, and the stability of thin phenotype is significantly lower than that of the thick group, which is a guide for orthodontists' clinical practice.

Key words: mini-implant, periodontal phenotype, stability, anchorage

李浩杰, 陈学鹏, 钟佳永. 不同牙周表型对微种植支抗钉稳定性的影响[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2023, 39(2): 124-128.

LI Haojie, CHEN Xuepeng, ZHONG Jiayong. Impact of Different Periodontal Phenotypes on Stability of Mini-implants[J]. Journal of Oral Science Research, 2023, 39(2): 124-128.

参考文献

[1] Arqub SA, Gandhi V, Mehta S, et al. Survival estimates and risk factors for failure of palatal and buccal mini-implants[J]. Angle Orthod, 2021, 91(6):756-763.
[2] Mohan S, Srinivasan D, Arumugam E, et al. Effect of placement angle, diameter, length and bone density on the pull-out strength of orthodontic mini-implants: An in vitro study[J]. J Orthod, 2022, 49(2):143-150.
[3] Costa A, Raffainl M, Melsen B. Miniscrews as orthodontic anchorage: a preliminary report[J]. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg, 1998, 13(3):201-209.
[4] Pradhan SP, Supriya N, Shravan S, et al. Is gingival biotype a critical determinant of secondary stability of orthodontic mini-implants-A prospective clinical study using resonance frequency analysis[J]. APOS Trends Orthod, 2020, 10(4):245-252.
[5] Kan JY, Morimoto T, Rungcharassaeng K, et al. Gingival biotype assessment in the esthetic zone: visual versus direct measurement[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2010, 30(3):237-243.
[6] Mombelli A, van Oosten MA, Schurch E, et al. The microbiota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants[J]. Oral Microbiol Immunol, 1987, 2(4):145-151.
[7] Gotfredsen K, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Bone reactions at implants subjected to experimental peri-implantitis and static load. A study in the dog[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2002, 29(2):144-151.
[8] Lyczek J, Kawala B, Antoszewska-Smith J. Influence of antibiotic prophylaxis on the stability of orthodontic microimplants: A pilot randomized controlled trial[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2018, 153(5):621-631.
[9] Takaki T, Tamura N, Yamamoto M, et al. Clinical study of temporary anchorage devices for orthodontic treatment--stability of micro/mini-screws and mini-plates: experience with 455 cases[J]. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll, 2010, 51(3):151-163.
[10] Motoyoshi M, Yoshida T, Ono A, et al. Effect of cortical bone thickness and implant placement torque on stability of orthodontic mini-implants[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2007, 22(5):779-784.
[11] Park HS, Jeong SH, Kwon OW. Factors affecting the clinical success of screw implants used as orthodontic anchorage[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2006, 130(1):18-25.
[12] Jepsen S, Caton JG, Albandar JM, et al. Periodontal manifestations of systemic diseases and developmental and acquired conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 3 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions[J]. J Periodontol, 2018, 89 Suppl 1:S237-S248.
[13] Shah R, Sowmya NK, Mehta DS. Prevalence of gingival biotype and its relationship to clinical parameters[J]. Contemp Clin Dent, 2015, 6(Suppl 1):S167-S171.
[14] Alhajj WA. Gingival phenotypes and their relation to age, gender and other risk factors[J]. BMC Oral Health, 2020, 20(1):87.
[15] Avila-Ortiz G, Gonzalez-Martin O, Couso-Queiruga E, et al. The peri-implant phenotype[J]. J Periodontol, 2020, 91(3):283-288.
[16] Sonmez G, Kamburoglu K, Gulsahi A. Accuracy of high-resolution ultrasound (US) for gingival soft tissue thickness mesurement in edentulous patients prior to implant placement[J]. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 2021, 50(5):20200309.
[17] Nagate RR, Tikare S, Chaturvedi S, et al. A novel perspective for predicting gingival biotype via dentopapillary measurements on study models in the Saudi population: Cross-sectional study[J]. Niger J Clin Pract, 2019, 22(1):56-62.
[18] Fernandes-Costa AN, Menezes KM, Borges SB, et al. A prospective study of the clinical outcomes of peri-implant tissues in patients treated for peri-implant mucositis and followed up for 54 months[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2019, 21(5):1099-1105.
[19] Topouzelis N, Tsaousoglou P. Clinical factors correlated with the success rate of miniscrews in orthodontic treatment[J]. Int J Oral Sci, 2012, 4(1):38-44.
[20] Azeem M, Saleem MM, Liaquat A, et al. Failure rates of mini-implants inserted in the retromolar area[J]. Int Orthod, 2019, 17(1):53-59.
[21] Isler SC, Uraz A, Kaymaz O, et al. An evaluation of the relationship between peri-implant soft tissue biotype and the severity of peri-implantitis: A cross-sectional study[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2019, 34(1):187-196.
[22] Al-Hafidh NN, Al-Khatib AR, Al-Hafidh NN. Assessment of the cortical bone thickness by CT-scan and its association with orthodontic implant position in a young adult Eastern Mediterranean population: A cross sectional study[J]. Int Orthod, 2020, 18(2):246-257.
[23] Ichinohe M, Motoyoshi M, Inaba M, et al. Risk factors for failure of orthodontic mini-screws placed in the median palatev[J]. J Oral Sci, 2019, 61(1):13-18.
[24] Rodrigues DM, Petersen RL, Montez C, et al. Relationship between anterior maxillary tooth sagittal root position and periodontal phenotype: a clinical and tomographic study[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2022, 26(2):1309-1321.
[25] Amid R, Mirakhori M, Safi Y, et al. Assessment of gingival biotype and facial hard/soft tissue dimensions in the maxillary anterior teeth region using cone beam computed tomography[J]. Arch Oral Biol, 2017, 79(1):1-6.
[26] Ashfaq M, Sadiq A, Sukhia RH, et al. Association of hard and soft tissue factors with gingival recession in orthodontically treated patients: A retrospective study[J]. Int Orthod, 2021, 19(1):60-66.
[27] Sreenivasagan S, Subramanian AK, Nivethigaa B. Assessment of insertion torque of mini-implant and its correlation with primary stability and pain levels in orthodontic patients[J]. J Contemp Dent Pract, 2021, 22(1):84-88.
[28] Nienkemper M, Willmann JH, Drescher D. Long-term stability behavior of paramedian palatal mini-implants: A repeated cross-sectional study[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2020, 157(2):165-171.

不同牙周表型对微种植支抗钉稳定性的影响

Impact of Different Periodontal Phenotypes on Stability of Mini-implants

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	耿琪, 张志宏, 刘红红, 陈佳, 韩倩, 徐笛. 后牙区皮质骨松质骨厚度比率与种植体稳定性的相关性研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2022, 38(11): 1033-1036.
[2]	陈晓波, 郑雅心, 张俊杰, 何洁. 种植支抗整体远移上牙列的三维分析研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2021, 37(11): 1054-1058.
[3]	焦星琦, 李阳, 伊彪. 下颌升支矢状劈开截骨术后下颌骨短期稳定性的三维分析[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2021, 37(10): 931-935.
[4]	向晓松, 苍松. 无托槽隐形矫治技术拔除前磨牙的支抗设计与临床控制[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2020, 36(2): 117-120.
[5]	吕曜光, 宋志强, 贾梦莹, 邵博, 曾雪敏, 龚忠诚. 3种方法治疗颞下颌关节滑膜炎的疗效评价[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2019, 35(12): 1149-1152.
[6]	薛美荣, 都冰丽, 荆璇, 武秀萍. 成人Ⅱ类骨面型上颌骨后牙区骨皮质厚度和安全性的锥形束CT研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2018, 34(6): 662-665.
[7]	张颖, 符策广, 卢锦芬, 张清彬. 两种咬合板治疗颞下颌关节紊乱病的临床疗效评价[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2018, 34(3): 294-297.
[8]	高洁,葛振林. 利用微螺钉种植体支抗矫治骨性Ⅲ类错牙合畸形的现状[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2018, 34(12): 1274-1276.
[9]	陈立艳, 刘志杰, 苑芳连, 张苗苗, 王兰珠. 颧牙槽嵴区骨宽度及皮质骨厚度的CBCT测量分析[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2017, 33(6): 637-641.
[10]	刘广美，刘海霞，吴晓亚，王为. 上颌牙列生理性支抗控制矫治器三维有限元模型的建立及应力分析[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2017, 33(3): 320-323.
[11]	庞琴, 王超, 马小娟, 杜全高, 吴婷婷, 付钢. IT与ISQ能反映种植体初期稳定性吗[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2017, 33(2): 150-153.
[12]	张玲阁,张睿,李喜红,丁文生,刘军. 透明质酸钠关节腔注射联合牙合垫治疗不可复性关节盘前移位的疗效评价[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2016, 32(8): 865-868.
[13]	雷菲菲梁芮 ,张晓洁,曾俊玲 ,林楚如. 两种微螺钉种植体支抗在上颌后牙根间区的稳定性研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2016, 32(5): 531-533.
[14]	吴也可,赵立星. 持续或间断应力加载下正畸微种植体稳定性的组织形态学和生物力学分析[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2016, 32(4): 326-330.
[15]	刘承灵, 王军, 任卫萍, 周瑞, 栗震亚. 腭骨厚度CBCT与头颅定位测量值的相关性研究[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2016, 32(3): 297-300.