À̸ðÀåÂøÀÚ ¹× ¾Ç±³Á¤¼ú ½ÃÇà ȯÀÚ¿Í Á¤»óÀΰúÀÇ »ó¾Ç°ñ, ÇϾǰñ ±æÀÌÀÇ ºñ±³¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸
A comparative study of maxillary and mandibular length : normal children, children treated by chin cap andnormal adult, class III adult treated by orthognatic surgery
È«¼ºÆÈ, ±è¹Ì¶õ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
È«¼ºÆÈ ( ) - ÇѸ²´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ±¸°¾Ç¾È¸é¿Ü°úÇб³½Ç
±è¹Ì¶õ ( ) - ÇѸ²´ëÇб³
KMID : 0355619920180030044
Abstract
It has been known that class ¥² malocclusion has various etiologic factors and characteristic maxillomandibular and dental relation. The treatment of class ¥² malocclusion is divied two type by treatment timing: early orthopedic treatment and
late
surgico-orthodontic treatment.
Nowadays, it is popular for the surgerns to use the combination of orthodontic treatment and orthognatic surgery. To study the timing of treatment of growing skeletal class ¥² children, we selected normal 30 male, 30 female children and skeletal
class
¥² 15 male children, 15 female children and skeletal ¥² 29 adult male, 29 adult female.
Cephalometric radiograph was treated by single investigator and maxillary, mandibular length was measured.
@ES The results were as follows;
@EN 1. The maxillary length of normal group in both children and adults were larger than malocclusion group in statistically level (p<0.001).
2. The mandibular length class ¥² malocclusion group in female children and adult is larger than normal group in statistically significant level (adult: p<0.01, female children: p<0.001).
3. Max/mand. ratio were 0.73 in class ¥² male children, 0.71 in female children and 0.66 in class ¥² male adult 0.67 in class ¥² feamle.
4. Difference of maxillary and mandibular length were 29.06mm in class ¥² male children, 29.96mm in female children and 47.19 mm in class ¥² male adult, 42.06 mm in class ¥² female adult.
Å°¿öµå
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸