{"title":"在治疗上颌窄弓时四螺旋和镍钛腭侧扩张器的比较:前瞻性临床研究。","authors":"Ameet Vaman Revankar, Sagar S Bhat, Joe E Rozario","doi":"10.4103/jos.jos_29_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The study aimed to compare the effects of quadhelix and nickel-titanium (NiTi) expander appliances on lower facial height, to quantify, and evaluate dentoalveolar and orthopedic changes in transverse plane, respectively, to estimate the difference in changes between these two appliances.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty patients, ten for the quadhelix and NiTi expander in the two-appliance group, respectively, participated in this study. A total of 8 readings, 1 for clinical facial height, 2 for model analysis, and 5 for posteroanterior cephalometric analysis were recorded. The statistical tests used were, Student's unpaired and paired t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both appliances individually, produced statistically highly significant (<i>p</i> < 0.01) expansion every month in both premolar and molar areas with more uniform expansion for quadhelix and less expansion in NiTi palatal expander in the premolar region initially. The skeletal to dental change ratio showed that there was more dental change than skeletal with no inter-appliance differences statistically while assessing the PA cephalometric readings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study infers that both appliances are equally efficacious maxillary expanders, which are primarily dentoalveolar and not skeletal (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p>","PeriodicalId":16604,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthodontic Science","volume":"12 ","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/09/57/JOS-12-8.PMC10282519.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of the quadhelix and the nickel-titanium palatal expander in the treatment of narrow maxillary arches: A prospective clinical study.\",\"authors\":\"Ameet Vaman Revankar, Sagar S Bhat, Joe E Rozario\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jos.jos_29_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The study aimed to compare the effects of quadhelix and nickel-titanium (NiTi) expander appliances on lower facial height, to quantify, and evaluate dentoalveolar and orthopedic changes in transverse plane, respectively, to estimate the difference in changes between these two appliances.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty patients, ten for the quadhelix and NiTi expander in the two-appliance group, respectively, participated in this study. A total of 8 readings, 1 for clinical facial height, 2 for model analysis, and 5 for posteroanterior cephalometric analysis were recorded. The statistical tests used were, Student's unpaired and paired t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both appliances individually, produced statistically highly significant (<i>p</i> < 0.01) expansion every month in both premolar and molar areas with more uniform expansion for quadhelix and less expansion in NiTi palatal expander in the premolar region initially. The skeletal to dental change ratio showed that there was more dental change than skeletal with no inter-appliance differences statistically while assessing the PA cephalometric readings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study infers that both appliances are equally efficacious maxillary expanders, which are primarily dentoalveolar and not skeletal (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthodontic Science\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/09/57/JOS-12-8.PMC10282519.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthodontic Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jos.jos_29_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthodontic Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jos.jos_29_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究目的该研究旨在比较四螺旋和镍钛(NiTi)扩张器对面部下部高度的影响,分别量化和评估牙槽骨和矫形器在横向平面上的变化,以估计这两种矫治器之间变化的差异:20名患者参加了此次研究,其中10名分别使用四螺旋扩弓器和镍钛扩弓器。共记录了 8 个读数,1 个用于临床面部高度,2 个用于模型分析,5 个用于后正位头颅测量分析。统计检验采用的是学生非配对和配对 t 检验:结果:两种矫治器在前磨牙区和磨牙区每月都有非常显著的扩张(P < 0.01),四螺旋扩张器的扩张更均匀,而镍钛腭侧扩张器在前磨牙区的扩张较小。骨骼与牙齿的变化比显示,牙齿的变化大于骨骼的变化,在评估 PA 头形测量读数时,矫治器之间没有统计学差异:本研究推断,这两种矫治器都是同样有效的上颌扩弓器,其主要作用是牙槽骨而不是骨骼(p < 0.05)。
A comparison of the quadhelix and the nickel-titanium palatal expander in the treatment of narrow maxillary arches: A prospective clinical study.
Objectives: The study aimed to compare the effects of quadhelix and nickel-titanium (NiTi) expander appliances on lower facial height, to quantify, and evaluate dentoalveolar and orthopedic changes in transverse plane, respectively, to estimate the difference in changes between these two appliances.
Materials and methods: Twenty patients, ten for the quadhelix and NiTi expander in the two-appliance group, respectively, participated in this study. A total of 8 readings, 1 for clinical facial height, 2 for model analysis, and 5 for posteroanterior cephalometric analysis were recorded. The statistical tests used were, Student's unpaired and paired t-tests.
Results: Both appliances individually, produced statistically highly significant (p < 0.01) expansion every month in both premolar and molar areas with more uniform expansion for quadhelix and less expansion in NiTi palatal expander in the premolar region initially. The skeletal to dental change ratio showed that there was more dental change than skeletal with no inter-appliance differences statistically while assessing the PA cephalometric readings.
Conclusions: This study infers that both appliances are equally efficacious maxillary expanders, which are primarily dentoalveolar and not skeletal (p < 0.05).