拔除第一前磨牙对第三磨牙倾角的影响

目的研究正畸治疗中拔除第一前磨牙进行矫治和非拔牙矫治对第二磨牙和第三磨牙倾角的影响。方法选择56例上下颌第三磨牙均存在的青少年正畸患者,按拔牙与否分为拔牙组（30例,拔除4颗第一前磨牙）和非拔牙组（26例）,通过术前术后曲面断层片来测量患者上下颌第三磨牙长轴和平面的交角,第二磨牙与平面的交角以及第二、第三磨牙长轴的交角,并进行统计学分析。结果拔牙与非拔牙组矫治前后第三磨牙倾角均有不同程度的改善。与非拔牙组相比,拔牙组上下颌第三磨牙长轴与平面交角的变化量更大,2组间年平均变化量的差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;2组矫治前后上下颌第二、第三磨牙长轴交角的变化无统计学差异,但其年平均变化量在2组间则有统计学差异（P<0.05）。2组间上颌第二磨牙与平面交角的年平均变化量无统计学差异（P>0.05）,而下颌第二磨牙与平面交角的年平均变化量则有统计学差异（P<0.05）。结论拔除第一前磨牙进行正畸治疗有利于第三磨牙倾角的改善,对第三磨牙萌出有积极意义。     

正畸治疗中磨牙的拔除与保留(十六)——正畸拔除下颌第一磨牙后第三磨牙位置和倾斜度变化

目的：探讨正畸拔除下颌第一磨牙对下颌第三磨牙位置和倾斜度的影响.方法：选择34例拔除下颌第一磨牙正畸治疗和29例非拔除下颌第一磨牙正畸治疗,对两组病例治疗前后头颅侧位片进行测量分析.观察矫治前后下颌第三磨牙在垂直方向、水平方向及倾斜角度的改变,比较两组之间的差异.结果：拔牙组和非拔牙组间治疗前后下颌第三磨牙垂直位置和倾斜度变化的差异没有统计学意义（P＞0.05）;拔牙组和非拔牙组间治疗前后下颌第三磨牙水平位置变化的差异具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.治疗后,拔牙组下颌第三磨牙比非拔牙组更靠近近中.结论：拔除下颌第一磨牙的正畸治疗加速了下颌第三磨牙向近中迁移.     

正畸拔除第一前磨牙对第三磨牙萌出角度的影响

目的：研究正畸拔除第一前磨牙对第三磨牙的影响。方法：37例第一前磨牙拔除和33例非拔牙患者作为研究对象,拍摄术前术后的全景片,测量第三磨牙长轴与平面及第三磨牙长轴与第二磨牙长轴的夹角,对治疗前后夹角的变化以U检验进行比较。结果：结果显示,拔除第一前磨牙后,下颌第三磨牙的的萌出角度得到了改善,而对上颌第三磨牙萌出改善并不明显。结论：拔除下颌第一前磨牙后,第三磨牙萌出角度会更加直立,从而可能减少其阻生的可能性。     

正畸拔除下颌第一磨牙对第三磨牙位置变化的影响

目的：通过比较正畸采用不同拔牙模式后第三磨牙位置的改变,探讨拔除下颌第一磨牙后对第三磨牙萌出的影响。方法：选择拔除下颌第一磨牙（15例）、第一前磨牙（20例）及非拔牙（20例）的3组青少年病例,3组患者正畸治疗前后及保持2年后拍全颌曲面断层片,对第三磨牙萌出的各项评价指标变化量进行比较研究。结果：在正畸治疗前后,第三磨牙萌出间隙改变量,拔第一磨牙组大于拔第一前磨牙组和非拔牙组,且差异均具有统计学意义。第三磨牙萌出角度改变量,拔第一磨牙组大于拔第一前磨牙组和非拔牙组,且差异均具有统计学意义。正畸保持2年后萌出间隙变化量虽均有增加但不具有统计学意义,第三磨牙萌出角度变化量拔第一磨牙组大于拔第一前磨牙组和非拔牙组,且差异均具有统计学意义。结论：正畸治疗中拔除下颌第一磨牙可增大下颌第三磨牙萌出间隙,第三磨牙更加直立,对第三磨牙的萌出有利。     

拔除第一磨牙矫治后第三磨牙萌出情况初探

目的:通过比较不同拔牙方法矫治后第三磨牙萌出的情况,评价拔除第一磨牙矫治对第三磨牙萌出的影响.方法:选取拔除第一磨牙矫治、拔除第一前磨牙矫治和非拔牙矫治3组病例(上颌各20例、下颌各30例),对全颌曲面断层片中测得矫治前后第三磨牙萌出的各项评价指标变化量进行比较研究.结果:(1)第三磨牙萌出间隙及其与牙冠近远中径的比值变化量在3组之间均有统计学差异(P<0.05),拔第一磨牙组大于拔第一前磨牙组和非拔牙组.(2)上颌第三磨牙萌出角度变化量在3组之间均有统计学差异(P<0.05),拔第一磨牙组大于拔第一前磨牙组和非拔牙组;下颌第三磨牙萌出角度的改变量在各组之间没有统计学差异(P>0.05).结论:上颌拔除第一磨牙矫治较常规矫治能明显增加第三磨牙的萌出间隙并改善其萌出角度;下颌拔除第一磨牙矫治较常规矫治能明显增加第三磨牙萌出间隙,而对于第三磨牙萌出角度3组间并无明显差异.     

�����γ��ڶ�ǰĥ���Ե���ĥ���ȳ�Ӱ����о�

目的    评价正畸拔除第二前磨牙对第三磨牙萌出角度和萌出间隙的影响。方法    选择2007年1月至2010年7月在济南市口腔医院正畸科行直丝弓正畸治疗的41例安氏Ⅰ类错牙合青少年患者,所有患者第二前磨牙及第二磨牙完全萌出,第三磨牙牙冠已形成但均未萌出。按治疗方法分为拔牙组（21例,均拔除4个第二前磨牙）和非拔牙组（20例）。在治疗前后分别拍摄全口曲面断层片,测量第三磨牙的倾斜角度和萌出间隙。结果    治疗前后上、下颌第三磨牙萌出间隙的增加值拔牙组大于非拔牙组,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.001）。上颌第三磨牙萌出角度的增加值拔牙组大于非拔牙组,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）,而下颌第三磨牙萌出角度的增加值两组间差异无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。结论    正畸拔除第二前磨牙可以增加上、下颌第三磨牙的萌出间隙,并使上颌第三磨牙萌出角度更加直立。     

下颌第二前磨牙拔除对青少年第三磨牙位置影响的观察

目的 探讨青少年正畸治疗中拔除下颌第二前磨牙对患者第三磨牙萌出位置的影响。方法 回顾性分析2007年1月—2010年1月在我门诊正畸治疗中拔除下颌第二前磨牙的55例患者的临床资料和随访资料,并以同期我院收治的未拔除下颌第二前磨牙的55例患者为对照组,比较两组患者治疗前后下颌第三磨牙位置变化情况。结果 观察组与对照组患者治疗前后第三磨牙位置均有不同程度改变,观察组主要表现为下颌第三磨牙萌出间隙增大,长轴与平面的交角变化量大。结论 拔除下颌第二前磨牙后,第三磨牙萌出间隙明显增大,有助于下颌第三磨牙的正常萌出。     

拔除病变第一磨牙后上、下颌第三磨牙正畸近移疗效比较

目的探讨拔除病变第一磨牙后上、下颌第三磨牙近移进行正畸治疗的效果。方法收集20例第一磨牙病变同时需要进行正畸治疗的患者,平均年龄18.6岁。根据患者口内情况将患者分为2组,每组10例。第一组上颌无明显拥挤,仅拔除病变的上颌第一磨牙,下颌拔牙或非拔牙矫治;第二组下颌无明显拥挤,仅拔除病变的下颌第一磨牙,上颌牙列拔牙或非拔牙治疗。全部病例均采用方丝弓矫治器,排齐整平牙列,关闭拔牙间隙,精细调整咬合关系。结果 20例患者都达到良好的矫治效果,双侧的磨牙、尖牙均达到良好的咬合关系。上颌第三磨牙前移平均8.8个月,平均近移7.94mm;下颌第三磨牙前移平均9.7个月,平均近移7.12mm。结论上、下颌由于存在骨质结构的差异,拔除无法保存的第一磨牙后,上颌第三磨牙近移比下颌磨牙较快。扶正簧的使用使倾斜的下颌磨牙得以直立。     

Comparative study of the movement of upper and lower third molars after extraction of decayed first molars in orthodontics

目的 探讨拔除病变第一磨牙后上、下颌第三磨牙近移进行正畸治疗的效果.方法 收集20例第一磨牙病变同时需要进行正畸治疗的患者,平均年龄18.6岁.根据患者口内情况将患者分为2组,每组10例.第一组上颌无明显拥挤,仅拔除病变的上颌第一磨牙,下颌拔牙或非拔牙矫治;第二组下颌无明显拥挤,仅拔除病变的下颌第一磨牙,上颌牙列拔牙或非拔牙治疗.全部病例均采用方丝弓矫治器,排齐整平牙列,关闭拔牙间隙,精细调整咬合关系.结果 20例患者都达到良好的矫治效果,双侧的磨牙、尖牙均达到良好的咬合关系.上颌第三磨牙前移平均8.8个月,平均近移7.94mm;下颌第三磨牙前移平均9.7个月,平均近移7.12mm.结论 上、下颌由于存在骨质结构的差异,拔除无法保存的第一磨牙后,上颌第三磨牙近移比下颌磨牙较快.扶正簧的使用使倾斜的下颌磨牙得以直立.     

正畸拔除下颌第一磨牙对第三磨牙位置变化的影响

目的 通过比较不同拔牙模式正畸治疗后第三磨牙位置的改变,探讨拔除下颌第一磨牙对发育中的第三磨牙萌出的影响.方法 选择39例青少年患者,并分为3组:下颌第一磨牙拔除组、第一前磨牙拔除组及不拔牙组,所有患者正畸治疗前后均拍摄全颌曲面断层片,比较研究第三磨牙萌出的各项评价指标的变化.结果 下颌第三磨牙萌出间隙和萌出角度在正畸治疗前后的年平均变化量,第一磨牙拔除组>第一前磨牙拔除组>不拔牙组,且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);下颌第三磨牙萌出间隙的年平均变化量,3组分别为(2.38±1.62)mm、(1.61±0.90)mm和(1.08±1.49)mm;萌出角度的年平均变化量,3组分别为1.89° ±1.93°,1.37° ±1.16°,和0.83° ±1.74°.结论 拔除下颌第一磨牙矫治可使第三磨牙的萌出间隙明显增加并使其萌出角度有所改善,对第三磨牙的萌出有利.     

The effects of first premolar extractions on third molar angulations

The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between the inclinations of second and third molars during a two- to 2.5-year period in patients treated orthodontically both with and without premolar extractions. Records of 37 first premolar extraction patients and 33 nonextraction patients were examined. The pretreatment and posttreatment panoramic radiographs were analyzed. The angles were measured between the long axis of the third molar and the occlusal plane and between the long axis of the third molar and the long axis of the second molar. Changes in third molar angulations from pretreatment to posttreatment for two groups were compared by Mann-Whitney U-test. Statistical analysis revealed that mandibular third molars showed an improvement in angulation relative to the occlusal plane in the first premolar extraction group.     

A comparison of the effects of first premolar extractions on third molar angulation.

The effect of third molars on the stability of orthodontic treatment has been studied extensively. Yet the effect of orthodontic treatment, particularly premolar extractions, on third molars has not been substantially studied. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the changes in third molar angulation in patients treated with and without extractions. Records of 45 Class I, nonextraction and 33 Class I, first premolar extraction patients were examined. The pretreatment and posttreatment pantographs were digitized, and the angles between the third molar long axes and the occlusal plane were measured. Changes in third molar angulation from pretreatment to posttreatment for the two groups were compared for statistical differences using a Student's t-test. Statistical analysis revealed there were no significant differences in the change in third molar angulation in either group. On average, the maxillary and mandibular third molars showed an improvement in angulation relative to the occlusal plane. The results suggest that factors other than first premolar extractions may influence third molar angulation.     

A comparison of results of second molar and first premolar extraction treatment

The purpose of this study was to examine treatment results of maxillary and mandibular second molar extraction cases and compare them with treatment results of maxillary and mandibular first-premolar extraction cases. Records of 22 maxillary and mandibular second-molar extraction cases and 22 maxillary and mandibular first-premolar extraction cases were evaluated. For each case, pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms were traced and several cephalometric parameters were compared. From the pretreatment and posttreatment panoramic radiographs, angulations of the maxillary and mandibular third molars were evaluated. Average treatment time, in months, was recorded for both groups. The data obtained from each group were analyzed for statistical difference. The results showed that the two groups had fewer differences than indicated by advocates of second-molar extractions. Analysis of the cephalometric data demonstrated only a few statistical differences between the groups. The maxillary and mandibular incisors in the premolar group were retracted a significantly greater amount than in the second-molar group. The maxillary and mandibular first molars were protracted a greater amount in the premolar group than in the second-molar group. The lower lips in the premolar group were retracted a greater amount than in the second-molar group. The resulting facial profile after extraction of second-molars appears to be no different from that obtained after extraction of first premolars. The pantographic evaluation of the changes in third-molar angulation were not statistically different. In both groups, the maxillary third molars showed an improvement in third-molar angulation, while the mandibular third-molars showed an undesirable increase in angulation. The average treatment time for both groups was not statistically different.     

Effect of premolar extraction on mandibular third molar impaction in young adults

Objective:To test the null hypothesis that orthodontic therapy with or without premolar extraction does not result in any difference in third molar impaction.Materials and Methods:Two groups were formed: 22 patients in one group with first premolar extractions and 22 patients in the other group without extractions. All patients were nongrowing subjects who had normal gonial angles and were skeletal Class I at the beginning of treatment. The available space for third molars, inclination of second and third molars, and angle between the second and third molars were evaluated. Also, the correlation of measured parameters and type of orthodontic therapy with the eruption of third molars was evaluated.Results:Of the third molars, 81.8% were impacted in the nonextraction group and 63.6% were impacted in the extraction group. Impaction of mandibular third molars was significantly correlated to the pretreatment and posttreatment inclination of third molars and the angle between the second and third molars. In the extraction therapy group, the retromolar distance increased significantly with a mean of 1.30 ± 1.25 mm.Conclusions:When the inclination of the third molar is inconvenient, the tooth may remain impacted even if there is enough retromolar space.     

正畸治疗中磨牙的拔除和保留(十一)——拔除第二磨牙与拔除第一前磨牙后第三磨牙牙胚位置的对比研究

目的：比较正畸治疗中拔除第二磨牙与拔除第一前磨牙后第三磨牙牙胚位置的不同改变。方法：选择拔除第二磨牙患者18例及拔除第一前磨牙患者20例，对两组治疗前后X线头颅侧位片进行测量分析。观察矫治前后第三磨牙在垂直方向、水平方向及倾斜角度的改变，比较两组间的差异。结果：两组病例上、下颌第三磨牙垂直位置的改变有显著性差异，拔除第二磨牙组比拔除第一前磨牙组第三磨牙向胎方移动快。水平距离的改变两组之间无差异。拔除第二磨牙组的下颌第三磨牙在矫治后明显竖直，与对照组之间存在显著性差异；矫治后两组上颌第三磨牙的角度均有较大改善，但两组之间的改变无差异。结论：拔除第二磨牙比拔除第一前磨牙加速了第三磨牙向骀方的移动，有利于下颌第三磨牙的竖直，为其以后的萌出创造了有利条件，减少了第三磨牙阻生的可能性。     

正畸拔除第一前磨牙对上下颌第三磨牙位置变化的影响

目的:研究第一前磨牙拔除后对第三磨牙位置变化的影响,探讨影响第三磨牙萌出的客观因素。方法:选择56例上下颌第三磨牙均存在的患者进行方丝弓正畸治疗,按照第一前磨牙拔除与否分为拔牙组(30例)和非拔牙组(26例),利用术前术后曲面断层片对患者上下颌第三磨牙萌出间隙、第三磨牙与牙合平面的距离以及下颌长度进行测量分析。结果:拔牙组术前术后各指标变化均有统计学意义,但是非拔牙组中下颌萌出间隙变化不具有统计学意义。拔牙组与非拔牙组术前术后变化量进行组间比较,上颌萌出间隙(U-ES)拔牙组比非拔牙组平均增大1.35 mm(P<0.05),下颌萌出间隙L-ES(R)和L-ES(X i)分别增大了2.72 mm(P<0.05)和3.16 mm(P<0.01),下颌第三磨牙与牙合平面的距离减小0.31 mm(P<0.05),下颌骨长度增加1.68 mm(P<0.05);上颌第三磨牙与牙合平面的距离变化在两组间没有统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论:正畸治疗中拔除第一前磨牙可增大上下颌第三磨牙萌出间隙,有利于第三磨牙的萌出。