The effects of invisible orthodontic appliances without brackets and labial fixed orthodontic appliances on periodontal status and root resorption in orthodontic patients
10.3760/cma.j.cn431274-20230224-00240
- VernacularTitle:无托槽隐形矫治器和唇侧固定矫治器对正畸患者牙周状况及牙根吸收的影响
- Author:
Linlin ZHENG
1
;
Xiukui WANG
;
Haixia FAN
;
Ran LI
Author Information
1. 济宁医学院附属医院口腔正畸科，济宁 272000
- Keywords:
Orthodontic appliances, fixed;
Orthodontic appliances, removable;
Orthodontics, corrective;
Root resorption
- From:
Journal of Chinese Physician
2024;26(1):58-62
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the effects of invisible orthodontic appliances without brackets and labial fixed orthodontic appliances on periodontal status and root resorption in orthodontic patients.Methods:A retrospective study was conducted on 102 orthodontic patients who visited the Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University from January 2019 to October 2022. According to different treatment methods, they were divided into group A ( n=52) and group B ( n=50). Group A was treated with invisible orthodontic appliances without brackets, while group B was treated with labial fixed orthodontic appliances. We compared two groups of treatment completion time, root resorption, and periodontal health indicators before and after treatment, including plaque index (PLI), gingival index (GI), gingival sulcus bleeding index (SBI), and levels of inflammatory factors in gingival crevicular fluid, including interleukin-1β (IL-1β) and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1). Results:The completion time of treatment in the Group A was longer than that in the group B [(34.62±4.28)months vs (28.93±3.11)months] ( P<0.01). After treatment, the incidence of root resorption in the group A was 50.96%, while in the group B it was 78.00%. The group A was significantly lower than the group B ( P<0.05), with no root resorption greater than 3 mm in the group A and 0.50% in the group B. After treatment, the levels of PLI, GI, SBI, and IL-1β and sICAM-1 in gingival crevicular fluid increased in both groups, with the group A being lower than group B [(1.26±0.39)points vs (1.73±0.54)points, (1.33±0.25)points vs (2.06±0.46)points, (1.73±0.40)points vs (2.48±0.50)points, (173.74±25.81)ng/ml vs (196.33±31.52)ng/ml, (42.28±5.16)μg/L vs (56.59±7.38)μg/L] (all P<0.05). Conclusions:Although invisible orthodontic appliances without brackets cannot shorten the completion time of treatment, they have advantages in inhibiting root resorption, improving periodontal health, and reducing inflammatory reactions. Clinically, appropriate appliances can be selected based on the specific situation of patients.
