论文部分内容阅读
目的:应用计算机及WINCEPH软件测量X线头颅定位侧位片,探讨不同术式治疗骨性安氏III类错效果的稳定性。方法:62例骨性安氏III类错患者36例接受下颌升支矢状劈开术(sagittal split ramus osteotomy,SSRO),26例接受下颌升支垂直骨切开术(intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy,IVRO),分别在手术前(T0)、手术后1个月(T1)、手术后6个月(T2)、手术后18个月以上(T3)拍摄头颅定位侧位片,利用计算机测量其各个阶段12个测量点矢状向变化,进行统计学分析。结果:SSRO术后出现与手术目的相反方向的复发;IVRO术后出现与手术目的相同方向的移位,无明显差异。结论:SSRO和IVRO方法各有其优缺点,术后移位率无明显差异,临床上选择哪一种术式应该根据患者具体情况来确定。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the stability of skeletal class III malocclusion treated by different surgical procedures by computer and WINCEPH software. Methods: Thirty-six patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion received sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) and 26 patients underwent vertical osteotomy (intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy) IVRO) were used to measure the cephalometric position of the skull in each group before operation (T0), 1 month after operation (T1), 6 months after operation (T2) and 18 months after operation (T3) Stages of 12 measurement points sagittal changes, for statistical analysis. Results: The recurrence in the opposite direction to the purpose of surgery occurred after SSRO. There was no significant difference in the shift in the same direction after surgery for IVRO. Conclusion: The methods of SSRO and IVRO each have their own advantages and disadvantages. There is no significant difference in the postoperative shift rate. Which type of operation should be chosen clinically should be determined according to the specific conditions of patients.