三种测量方法对下颌平面角判断影响的探究

卢云; 刘世杰; 李佳伦; 孔润泽; 王林

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115797-20220511-22404

高级检索

IP登录

登录IP

切换

退出

中华口腔正畸学杂志

• 论著 •

ENGLISH ABSTRACT

三种测量方法对下颌平面角判断影响的探究

作者及单位信息

出版日期： 2022 -12 -20 ·

DOI： 10.3760/cma.j.cn115797-20220511-22404

Effects of three measurement methods on determining the mandibular plane angle

Authors Info & Affiliations

Lu Yun

Department of Orthodontics, College of Stomatology, Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116044, China

Liu Shijie

Department of Orthodontics, College of Stomatology, Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116044, China

Li Jialun

West China of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 116091, China

Kong Runze

Department of Orthodontics, College of Stomatology, Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116044, China

Wang Lin

Department of Orthodontics, Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Jiangsu Province Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Nanjing 210029, China

Published： 2022 -12 -20 ·

DOI： 10.3760/cma.j.cn115797-20220511-22404

APP内阅读

摘要

目的探究3种不同定义的下颌平面MP(G)(颏顶点Gn与下颌角点Go连线)、MP(T)(下颌下缘最低部的切线)、MP(Me)(过颏下点Me与下颌角下缘切线)对下颌平面角测量的影响。

方法本研究为回顾性研究，收集我院正畸科初诊患者400例，测量分析头侧位片并进行高、低角筛选，分析影响下颌平面角测量的相关因素。

结果①在MP-SN组和MP-FH组中，MP(T)所成下颌平面角与MP(G)、MP(Me)所成下颌平面角差异有统计学意义[MP(G)-SN：37.00°±6.25°，MP(T)-SN：39.44°±7.08°，MP(Me)-SN：37.04°±7.12°；MP(G)-SN vs MP(T)-SN： P<0.001，MP(T)-SN vs MP(Me)-SN： P<0.001；MP(G)-FH：28.21°±5.58°，MP(T)-FH：30.65°±6.35°，MP(Me)-FH：28.25°±6.40°，MP(G)-FH vs MP(T)-FH： P<0.001，MP(T)-FH vs MP(Me)-FH： P<0.001]，而MP(G)与MP(Me)所成下颌平面角差异无统计学意义[MP(G)-SN vs MP(Me)-SN： P＝0.653；MP(G)-FH vs MP(Me)-FH： P＝0.620]；②MP(G)、MP(T)、MP(Me)平面在MP-SN、MP-FH两组组内及组间筛出高角、低角病例数不一致；③高角组中，MP(G)-FH与颏部形态无明显相关性(颏厚度/颏高度： r＝－0.090， P＝0.381；颏角： r＝－0.135， P＝0.189)；低角组中，MP(Me)-FH与颏部形态无明显相关性(颏厚度： r＝－0.258， P＝0.194；颏角： r＝－0.229， P＝0.109；颏前点高度/颏高度： r＝－0.318， P＝0.100)。

结论医师在诊断分析中应注意MP(T)、MP(G)、MP(Me)所构成的下颌平面角存在差异，同组中MP(T)所构成的下颌平面角最大，MP(G)与MP(Me)所构成下颌平面角差异无统计学意义；建议可将MP(G)-FH、MP(Me)-FH分别作为筛选高角、低角病例时测量下颌平面的参考指标。

关键词：下颌平面;下颌平面角;垂直向;高角;低角

ABSTRACT

ObjectiveTo investigate how the three mandibular plane definitions, which are MP(G), a line connecting the points Gonion to Gnathion, MP(T), a line tangent to the inferior border of the mandible, and MP(Me), a line tangent to the posterior lower border of the mandible and Mention) can affect the measurements of mandibular plane angle.

MethodsFour hundred new cases in our hospital were collected and measured. The high and low angles cases were screened, and the factors affecting measurement of mandibular plane were analyzed.

Results① Significant differences were detected between MP (T) plane and MP (G) plane, or MP (Me) plane in both MP-SN group and MP-FH group[MP(G)-SN: 37.00°±6.25°, MP(T)-SN: 39.44°±7.08°, MP(Me)-SN: 37.04°±7.12°, MP(G)-SN vs MP(T)-SN: P<0.001, MP(T)-SN vs MP(Me)-SN: P<0.001; MP(G)-FH: 28.21°± 5.58°, MP(T)-FH: 30.65°± 6.35°, MP(Me)-FH: 28.25°±6.40°, MP(G)-FH vs MP(T)-FH: P<0.001, MP(T)-FH vs MP(Me)-FH: P<0.001; no statistical difference was found between MP(G)-SN and MP(Me)-SN, P=0.653, and MP(G)-FH and MP(Me)-FH: P=0.620]; ② The numbers of high angle and low angle cases screened by MP (G), MP (T) and MP (Me) were inconsistent both in MP-SN and MP-FH groups and between two groups; ③ In high angle group, only MP (G)-FH had no correlation with mental morphology (Ratio of chin thickness to Chin height: r=-0.090, P=0.381; Chin angle: r=-0.135, P=0.189); In low angle group, MP(Me)-FH had no correlation with the mental morphology (Chin thickness: r=-0.258, P=0.194; Chin angle: r=-0.229, P=0.109; Ratio of the height of Pogonion height to Chin height: r=-0.318, P=0.100).

ConclusionsOrthodontists should pay attention to the difference of mandibular plane angle formed by MP (T), MP (G) and MP (Me) in diagnosis and analysis. The mandibular plane angle by MP (T) is larger than MP (G) and MP (Me) formed, which have no statistical difference. It is suggested that MP (G)-FH could be used as screen reference for the high angle case, and MP(Me)-FH as the reference for the low angle case.

KEYWORDS： Mandibular plane;Mandibular plane angle;Vertical direction;High angle;Low angle

Corresponding author: Wang Lin, E-mail: nc.defudabe.umjn306wl, Tel: 0086-25-86862025

FUNDING:

National Natural Science Foundation of China（81801016）

Department of Science and Technology of Liaoning province（2019-ZD-0627）

COPYRIGHTS:

No content published by the journals of Chinese Medical Association may be reproduced or abridged without authorization. Please do not use or copy the layout and design of the journals without permission.

All articles published represent the opinions of the authors, and do not reflect the official policy of the Chinese Medical Association or the Editorial Board, unless this is clearly specified.

引用本文

卢云,刘世杰,李佳伦,等. 三种测量方法对下颌平面角判断影响的探究[J]. 中华口腔正畸学杂志,2022,29(04)：196-200.

DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115797-20220511-22404

PERMISSIONS

Request permissions for this article from CCC.

评价本文

*以上评分为匿名评价

版权归中华医学会所有。

未经授权，不得转载、摘编本刊文章，不得使用本刊的版式设计。

除非特别声明，本刊刊出的所有文章不代表中华医学会和本刊编委会的观点。

下颌平面角由下颌平面(mandibular plane，MP)与眶耳平面(frankfort horizontal plane，FH)或前颅底平面(sella nasion plane，SN)的交角组成，是正畸诊断分析、治疗及预后重要评价指标之一 ^{[
1
,

2
]}，也被认为是评估垂直向最可靠的指标 ^{[
3
]}。已有研究认为下颌平面角受SNB、Y轴角、前后面高比等因素影响 ^{[
4
]}，也可能受SN-FH角度变化影响 ^{[
5
]}。下颌平面不同确定方法是否会影响下颌平面角大小测量以及对高低角的筛选，目前尚未见文献报道 ^{[
1
]}。此外，颏部形态在不同垂直骨面型存在差异 ^{[
6
]}；颏部高度与厚度不同对颏顶点(gnathion，Gn)、颏下点(menton，Me)以及下颌前下部切线均有影响，是否亦会影响下颌平面角尚未见文献报道。

本研究通过测量400例头颅侧位片，探讨下颌平面不同的确定方法对下颌平面角测量的影响，以期为正畸病例诊断分析、治疗方案制订等临床诊疗以及科研工作提供理论依据。

试读结束，您可以通过登录机构账户或个人账户后获取全文阅读权限。

已是订阅账户? 登录

摘要
参考文献

参考文献

[1]

Chen Y , Zhang J , Rao N ，et al. Do patients with different mandibular plane angles have different time to relapse after bilateral sagittal osteotomy with mandibular advancement？[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg， 2020，78(3)：455－466. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2019.09.017 .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[2]

Tweed CH . The Frankfort-mandibular plane angle in orthodontic diagnosis, classification, treatment planning, and prognosis[J]. Am J Orthod Oral Surg， 1946，32：175－230. DOI: 10.1016/0096-6347(46)90001-4 .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[3]

Ahmed M , Shaikh A ， Fida M . Diagnostic performance of various cephalometric parameters for the assessment of vertical growth pattern[J]. Dental Press J Orthod， 2016，21(4)：41－49. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.21.4.041-049.oar .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[4]

Ahmed M , Shaikh A ， Fida M . Diagnostic performance of various cephalometric paramete rs for the assessment of vertical growth pattern [J]. Dental Press J Orthod， 2016，21(4)：41－49. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.21.4.041-049.oar .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[5]

张君孝，乔鸣芳. 280例正畸初诊患者下颌平面角观察研究[J]．现代口腔医学杂志， 2008，22(2):161－163. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-7632.2008.02.016 .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

Zhang JX ， Qiao MF . A study on MP plane of 280 orthodontic patients[J]. J Modern Stoma， 2008，22(2):161－163. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-7632.2008.02.016 .

Goto CitationGoogle Scholar

Baidu Scholar

Wanfang Data

[6]

贾培增，吴威．不同垂直骨面型者的颏部形态[J]．华西口腔医学杂志， 2007，25(2)：142－145. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-1182.2007.02.012 .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

Jia PZ , Wu W . Chin morphology in subjects with different vertical skeletal craniofacial pattern[J]. West China J Stoma, 2007,25(2):142－145. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-1182.2007.02.012 .

Goto CitationGoogle Scholar

Baidu Scholar

Wanfang Data

[7]

钱玉芬．错畸形的诊断 //赵志河．口腔正畸学. 7版．北京：人民卫生出版社， 2020:65.

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[8]

Downs WB . Variations in facial relationships; their significance in treatment and prognosis[J]. Am J Orthod， 1948，34(10)：812－840. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(48)90015-3 .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[9]

Steiner C ．Cephalometrics for you and me[J]. Am J Orthod, 1953,39(10):729－755. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(53)90082-7 .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[10]

Hocevar RA , Stewart MC . A study of reference lines for mandibular plane angles[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop， 1992，102(6)：519－526. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(92)70068-L .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[11]

Hardin AM ， Valiathan M , Oh H ，et al. Clinical implications of age-related change of the mandibular plane angle[J]. Orthod Craniofac Res， 2020，23(1)：50－58. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12342 .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

[12]

吴建勇，张铭．恒牙列早期深、浅下颌角前切迹与颅面形态的相关研究[J]. 上海口腔医学， 2001, (3):217－220. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7248.2001.03.009 .

返回引文位置Google Scholar

百度学术

万方数据

Wu JY , Zhang M . A comparative study of craniofacial morphologic differences between groups with shallow and deep antegonial notch depth[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2001, (3):217－220. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7248.2001.03.009 .

Goto CitationGoogle Scholar

Baidu Scholar

Wanfang Data

备注信息

通信作者：王林，E-mail： nc.defudabe.umjn306wl，电话：025-86862025

作者贡献说明

卢云：研究设计，头颅侧位片测量分析，研究文章撰写；刘世杰、李佳伦、孔润泽：数据录入及分析，作图；王林：研究设计，文章修改及审阅

利益冲突

所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突

基金项目：

国家自然科学基金 (81801016) 查看更多基金信息

辽宁省科技厅 (2019-ZD-0627) 查看更多基金信息

评论 （0条）

暂无评论，发表第一条评论抢沙发