下颌切牙牙根与牙槽骨反应的差异——骨性Ⅲ类掩饰性与联合治疗比较

doi:10.13591/j.cnki.kqyx.2026.05.007

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To compare mandibular incisor root resorption and alveolar bone remodeling in adults with skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion treated by orthodontic camouflage versus combined orthodontic-orthognathic therapy. Methods Thirty adults were enrolled and allocated to a camouflage group （CA，n=15） or a combined treatment group （CO，n=15）. Cone-beam CT （CBCT） was used to measure root length，labial/lingual vertical bone level （La-/L-VBL），and alveolar bone thickness （ABT） at multiple levels before and after treatment； in the CO group，an additional presurgical decompensation time point was assessed. Within-group changes were tested with paired t tests or repeated-measures ANOVA，between-group differences with independent-samples t tests. Results Both groups showed mild root shortening，with significant increases in L-VBL. La-VBL changed little in the CA group but increased markedly after decompensation in the CO group and then stabilized postoperatively. Lingual ABT decreased significantly in both groups； labial changes were minimal in CA. In CO，labial cervical thinning with apical thickening was observed during decompensation，with the same direction of change but smaller magnitude after surgery. Overall，the reduction in lingual ABT was greater in CA，whereas labial mid-apical thickness recovered more readily in CO. Conclusion The magnitude of root resorption was similar between approaches. The lingual plate is the principal site of bone loss； camouflage more readily induces widespread thinning and crestal apicalization，while the combined approach shows better postoperative recovery of labial mid-apical bone.

Key words: skeletal Class Ⅲ, combined orthodontic-orthognathic treatment, camouflage treatment, cone-beam CT

CLC Number:

R783.5

WANG Ruowen, WANG Hua. Comparative evaluation of root resorption and alveolar bone remodeling of mandibular incisors following camouflage treatment versus orthognathic surgery combined with orthodontics with skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion[J]. Stomatology, 2026, 46(5): 363-368.

Figures/Tables 7

Tab.1

Tab.2

Fig.1

Fig.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

References 26

[1]	Araujo MTS, Squeff LR. Orthodontic camouflage as a treatment alternative for skeletal Class Ⅲ[J]. Dental Press J Orthod, 2021, 26(4):e21bbo24.
[2]	Möhlhenrich SC, Kötter F, Peters F, et al. Effects of different surgical techniques and displacement distances on the soft tissue profile orthodontic-orthognathic treatment of Class Ⅱ and Class Ⅲ malocclusions[J]. Head Face Med, 2021, 17(1):13.
[3]	Eslami S, Faber J, Fateh A, et al. Treatment decision in adult patients with Class Ⅲ malocclusion:Surgery versus orthodontics[J]. Prog Orthod, 2018, 19(1):28.
[4]	Xiao Y, Sun X, Wang L, et al. The application of 3D Printing technology for simultaneous orthognathic surgery and mandibular contour osteoplasty in the treatment of craniofacial deformities[J]. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2017, 41(6):1413-1424.
[5]	Kee YJ, Moon HE, Lee KC. Evaluation of alveolar bone changes aroundmandibular incisors during surgical orthodontic treatment of patients with mandibular prognathism: Surgery-first approach vs. conventional orthognathic surgery[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2023, 163(1):87-94.
[6]	Handelman CS. The anterior alveolus:Its importance in limiting orthodontic treatment and its influence on the occurrence of iatrogenic sequelae[J]. Angle Orthod, 1996, 66(2):95-109;discussion109-110.
[7]	Weltman B, Vig KW, Fields HW, et al. Root resorption associa-ted with orthodontic tooth movement:A systematic review[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2010, 137(4):462-476;discussion 12A.
[8]	Iber-Díaz P, Senen-Carramolino R, Iglesias-Linares A, et al. GWAS of Post-orthodontic aggressive external apical root resorption identified multiple putative loci at X-Y chromosomes[J]. J Pers Med, 2020, 10(4):169.
[9]	Sameshima GT, Sinclair PM. Predicting and preventing root resorption: Part I. Diagnostic factors[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2001, 119(5):505-510.
[10]	Sondeijker CFW, Lamberts AA, Beckmann SH, et al. Develop-ment of a clinical practice guideline for orthodontically induced external apical root resorption[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2020, 42(2):115-124.
[11]	Spurrier SW, Hall SH, Joondeph DR, et al. A comparison of apical root resorption during orthodontic treatment in endodontically treated and vital teeth[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1990, 97(2):130-134.
[12]	Linkous ER, Trojan TM, Harris EF. External apical root resorption and vectors of orthodontic tooth movement[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2020, 158(5):700-709.
[13]	Segal GR, Schiffman PH, Tuncay OC. Meta analysis of the treatment-related factors of external apical root resorption[J]. Orthod Craniofac Res, 2004, 7(2):71-78.
[14]	Chen PJ, Chang JH, Dutra EH, et al. The effect of alveolar decortication on orthodontically induced root resorption[J]. Angle Orthod, 2020, 90(4):524-531.
[15]	Brezniak N, Wasserstein A. Root resorption revisited: The paradigm of force effect on root resorption: Is a “paradigm shift” needed in order to learn more about the phenomenon?[J]. Angle Orthod, 2019, 89(3):518-520.
[16]	Alghamdi B, Jeon HH, Ni J, et al. Osteoimmunology in periodontitis and orthodontic tooth movement[J]. Curr Osteoporos Rep, 2023, 21(2):128-146.
[17]	Kim Y, Park JU, Kook YA. Alveolar bone loss around incisors in surgical skeletal Class Ⅲ patients[J]. Angle Orthod, 2009, 79(4):676-682.
[18]	Sarikaya S, Haydar B, Ciğer S, et al. Changes in alveolar bone thickness due to retraction of anterior teeth[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2002, 122(1):15-26.
[19]	Roberts WE, Huja S, Roberts JA. Bone modeling:Biomechanics, molecular mechanisms, and clinical perspectives[J]. Semin Orthod, 2004, 10(2):123-161.
[20]	Lund H, Gröndahl K, Hansen K, et al. Apical root resorption during orthodontic treatment. A prospective study using cone beam CT[J]. Angle Orthod, 2012, 82(3):480-487.
[21]	Brezniak N, Wasserstein A. Root resorption after orthodontic treatment: Part 1. Literature review[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1993, 103(1):62-66.
[22]	Levander E, Malmgren O. Evaluation of the risk of root resorption during orthodontic treatment:A study of upper incisors[J]. Eur J Orthod, 1988, 10(1):30-38.
[23]	Bonjour JP, Kohrt W, Levasseur R, et al. Biochemical markers for assessment of calcium economy and bone metabolism:Application in clinical trials from pharmaceutical agents to nutritional products[J]. Nutr Res Rev, 2014, 27(2):252-267.
[24]	Vardimon AD, Oren E, Ben-Bassat Y. Cortical bone remodeling/tooth movement ratio during maxillary incisor retraction with tip versus torque movements[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998, 114(5):520-529.
[25]	Makki L, Ferguson DJ, Wilcko MT, et al. Mandibular irregularity index stability following alveolar corticotomy and grafting:A 10-year preliminary study[J]. Angle Orthod, 2015, 85(5):743-749.
[26]	Chen Z, Zhou H, Zhang K, et al. The clinical efficacy of periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics in patients with bone fenestration and dehiscence:A retrospective study[J]. Head Face Med, 2022, 18(1):40.

样本特征	掩饰性治疗组（n=15）	正畸-正颌联合治疗组（n=15）
性别（男/女）	7/8	6/9
年龄/岁	21.07±2.96	20.80±2.08
治疗时长/月
术前去代偿	-	13.12±6.39
术后精细调整	-	9.16±4.97
总治疗时长	26.87±12.24	23.12±6.63

骨面型描述	治疗前（T0）		P
骨面型描述	掩饰性治疗组（CA）	正畸-正颌联合治疗组（CO）	P
SNA/（°）	82.45±3.06	82.16±3.65	0.817
SNB/（°）	84.05±2.70	86.05±4.60	0.157
ANB/（°）	-1.61±1.01	-2.90±1.54	0.061
Wits/mm	-6.44±2.69	-11.88±4.10	0.001^*
FMA/（°）	25.89±3.55	24.44±4.06	0.306
SN-GoGn/（°）	29.15±4.36	29.99±5.03	0.629
U1-SN/（°）	111.18±7.63	108.93±6.06	0.378
U1-NA/mm	7.29±3.30	7.33±2.85	0.967
U1-NA/（°）	28.73±7.99	26.79±5.88	0.457
L1-GoGn/（°）	87.39±6.70	82.77±6.49	0.065
L1-NB/mm	4.37±2.44	4.56±2.30	0.831
L1-NB/（°）	20.59±6.01	18.80±5.89	0.418
IMPA/（°）	83.31±6.76	79.21±6.06	0.092

测量变量	治疗前（T0'）	治疗后（T1'）	P
中切牙
牙根长度	11.05±0.97	10.51±1.01	0.000^*
La-VBL	1.88±0.97	2.15±0.94	0.100
L-VBL	1.82±0.69	4.41±2.61	0.000^*
La-S1	0.56±0.32	0.53±0.45	0.580
La-S2	0.42±0.23	0.45±0.34	0.685
La-S3	0.95±0.47	1.02±0.52	0.560
La-S4	2.97±1.03	3.40±1.15	0.067
L-S1	0.78±0.49	0.15±0.19	0.000^*
L-S2	1.55±0.78	0.44±0.51	0.000^*
L-S3	3.01±1.19	1.29±1.14	0.000^*
L-S4	5.67±4.60	3.87±1.80	0.000^*
侧切牙
牙根长度	12.21±0.98	11.43±1.23	0.000^*
La-VBL	1.64±0.75	2.10±0.89	0.000^*
L-VBL	1.72±0.59	2.88±1.71	0.001^*
La-S1	0.61±0.30	0.62±0.35	0.863
La-S2	0.30±0.24	0.41±0.33	0.045
La-S3	1.08±0.65	1.13±0.80	0.685
La-S4	3.57±1.29	3.82±1.32	0.260
L-S1	0.95±0.52	0.30±0.34	0.000^*
L-S2	1.69±0.79	0.97±0.86	0.000^*
L-S3	2.83±1.23	1.73±1.56	0.000^*
L-S4	5.12±1.57	4.14±1.99	0.000^*

测量变量	治疗前（T0）	正颌术前（T1）	治疗后（T2）	P	多重比较
中切牙
牙根长度	11.70±1.00	11.00±0.96	10.49±1.12	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
La-VBL	2.42±0.68	3.67±2.31	3.14±2.27	0.000^*	T1>T2>T0
L-VBL	2.19±0.81	4.06±2.38	4.36±2.42	0.000^*	T2>T1>T0
La-S1	0.63±0.35	0.37±0.40	0.40±0.39	0.002^*	T0>T2>T1
La-S2	0.63±0.21	0.51±0.31	0.55±0.33	0.907	-
La-S3	0.76±0.28	0.88±0.49	0.94±0.70	0.207	-
La-S4	2.25±0.73	3.26±0.98	3.17±1.33	0.000^*	T1>T2>T0
L-S1	0.51±0.35	0.18±0.26	0.05±0.15	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
L-S2	1.06±0.43	0.53±0.33	0.35±0.29	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
L-S3	1.98±0.72	0.95±0.81	0.66±0.54	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
L-S4	4.45±1.03	2.87±1.18	2.72±1.19	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
侧切牙
牙根长度	12.46±0.97	11.97±1.04	11.42±1.09	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
La-VBL	2.57±1.17	3.43±1.87	3.36±1.76	0.000^*	T1>T2>T0
L-VBL	2.47±0.81	3.57±2.38	4.66±2.44	0.000^*	T2>T1>T0
La-S1	0.67±0.25	0.45±0.40	0.42±0.39	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
La-S2	0.50±0.19	0.53±0.28	0.55±0.26	0.472	-
La-S3	0.71±0.22	0.92±0.35	1.09±0.53	0.000^*	T2>T1>T0
La-S4	2.45±0.63	3.56±0.85	3.65±1.31	0.000^*	T2>T1>T0
L-S1	0.57±0.56	0.10±0.23	0.09±0.26	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
L-S2	1.21±0.68	0.64±0.44	0.53±0.40	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
L-S3	1.91±0.78	0.91±0.66	0.83±0.61	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2
L-S4	4.15±1.04	2.85±0.74	2.81±1.03	0.000^*	T0>T1>T2

测量变量	掩饰性治疗（T1'-T0'）	联合治疗组（T1-T0）	联合治疗组（T2-T0）	$\frac{T1\text{'}-T0\text{'}/T1-T0}{P}$	$\frac{T1\text{'}-T0\text{'}/T2-T0}{P}$
中切牙
牙根长度	-0.54±0.27	-0.70±0.64	-1.21±0.86	0.203	0.802
La-VBL	0.27±0.86	1.25±2.22	0.72±2.17	0.027^*	0.124
L-VBL	2.59±2.53	1.87±2.47	2.17±2.32	0.270	0.001^*
La-S1	-0.03±0.33	-0.26±0.44	-0.23±0.37	0.025^*	0.480
La-S2	0.03±0.40	-0.12±0.27	-0.08±0.35	0.103	0.946
La-S3	0.07±0.65	0.12±0.45	0.19±0.66	0.714	0.967
La-S4	0.43±1.24	1.01±0.87	0.92±1.16	0.041^*	0.076
L-S1	-0.63±0.47	-0.33±0.35	-0.46±0.38	0.007^*	0.000^*
L-S2	-1.12±0.69	-0.53±0.50	-0.71±0.51	0.000^*	0.000^*
L-S3	-1.72±1.18	-1.02±0.77	-1.31±0.54	0.009^*	0.000^*
L-S4	-1.80±1.55	-1.58±1.19	-1.73±1.13	0.540	0.000^*
侧切牙
牙根长度	-0.77±0.61	-0.49±0.84	-1.04±0.81	0.146	0.155
La-VBL	0.46±0.51	0.86±1.72	0.79±1.85	0.026^*	0.351
L-VBL	1.16±1.64	1.10±2.22	2.19±2.44	0.061	0.059
La-S1	0.01±0.21	-0.22±0.33	-0.26±0.32	0.002^*	0.000^*
La-S2	0.11±0.28	0.03±0.32	0.04±0.30	0.303	0.401
La-S3	0.05±0.67	0.21±0.32	0.38±0.48	0.233	0.031^*
La-S4	0.25±1.18	1.11±0.66	1.19±1.12	0.000^*	0.002^*
L-S1	-0.66±0.48	-0.49±0.42	-0.48±0.42	0.016^*	0.136
L-S2	-0.73±0.72	-0.57±0.59	-0.68±0.48	0.034^*	0.769
L-S3	-1.10±1.16	-1.00±0.78	-1.08±0.77	0.041^*	0.917
L-S4	-0.98±1.35	-1.35±0.77	-1.34±1.00	0.206	0.255

Comparative evaluation of root resorption and alveolar bone remodeling of mandibular incisors following camouflage treatment versus orthognathic surgery combined with orthodontics with skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 26

Related Articles 12

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	CHEN Ziang, LIU Ziang, OUYANG Yuqing, LOU Yiting, SHI Jiejun, DING Wanghui. A review of the relation between peripheral anatomical structures and external apical root resorption during orthodontic treatment [J]. Stomatology, 2025, 45(5): 394-400.
[2]	SHAN Xuelong, LI Xiangxin, MENG Jian, ZHANG Jing. The correlation between Balkwill angle and occlusal plane angles and temporomandibular joint morphology [J]. Stomatology, 2025, 45(5): 328-334.
[3]	WANG Bo, CHANG Xin. Evaluation of three-dimensional osseous structure of temporomandibular joint according to sagittal skeletal patterns: A cone-beam computed tomography study [J]. Stomatology, 2024, 44(9): 685-691.
[4]	FAN Siyu, XUE Yiwen, SONG Xiao, DENG Runzhi, HAO Jing. Study on clinical characteristics of impacted maxillary canine-linked incisor root resorption [J]. Stomatology, 2023, 43(7): 638-642.
[5]	XIAO Yuhuan, HOU Wei, SHI Jiali, LIU Fei, WANG Zhendong, ZHOU Weina. Three-dimensional analysis of upper airway in patients with non-syndromic cleft lip and palate and skeletal Class Ⅲ [J]. Stomatology, 2023, 43(6): 529-533.
[6]	CHEN Yuyan, ZHANG Zhihong, LIU Honghong, HAN Qian, CHEN Jia, DUAN Linna. Influence of cortical bone thickness in mandibular posterior region on the accuracy of implantation [J]. Stomatology, 2022, 42(8): 713-716.
[7]	ZHOU Wei, WANG Lin, WANG Liang, ZHAO Chunyang. Study on root resorption of adjacent incisors after traction treatment of maxillary impacted canines [J]. Stomatology, 2022, 42(6): 525-528.
[8]	LEI Chen, YU Qun, Khulood Ali ALTAEZI, TANG Chunbo. Cone-beam CT analysis of the correlation between the alveolar bone widths of maxillary lateral incisors and canine relationship [J]. Stomatology, 2022, 42(5): 425-430.
[9]	. To analyze the correlative factors of the gingival biotype of the maxillary central incisor [J]. , 2017, 37(7): 615-620.
[10]	. Study on alveolar bone thickness around apex of central incisor of early youth by cone beam computed tomography [J]. , 2015, 35(10): 838-841.
[11]	. Cortical bone thickness in buccal posterior region and bone depth of mandible: A CBCT analysis [J]. , 2014, 34(8): 604-607.
[12]	. Preliminary study on chin soft tissue thickness of adults with different skeletal patterns using CBCT [J]. , 2014, 34(10): 754-757.