Yan LB, Zhou YC, Wang Y, Li LX. Orthodontic treatment combined with 3D printing guide plate implant restoration for edentulism and its influence on mastication and phonic function. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(16): 5297-5305 [PMID: 35812655 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i16.5297]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Li-Xin Li, BM, Physician, Department of Administration, Lintong Rehabilitation and Convalescent Center, No. 32 Huaqing Road, Lintong District, Xi’an 710000, Shaanxi Province, China. lilixinllx58@163.com
Research Domain of This Article
Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine
Article-Type of This Article
Prospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Clin Cases. Jun 6, 2022; 10(16): 5297-5305 Published online Jun 6, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i16.5297
Table 1 Comparison of the general data between the groups
Group
Sex (male/female)
Dentition defects (full mouth/upper/lower)
Body mass index (kg/m2)
Age (yr)
Control group (n = 43)
20/23
8/12/23
24.83 ± 2.24
45.60 ± 3.26
Intervention group (n = 43)
22/21
9/18/16
24.97 ± 2.22
45.74 ± 4.37
χ2/t value
0.186
2.515
0.291
0.168
P value
0.667
0.284
0.772
0.867
Table 2 Comparison of the treatment effect between the groups, n (%)
Group
Significantly effective
Effective
Ineffective
Overall response rate
Control group (n = 43)
15 (34.88)
20 (46.51)
8 (18.60)
35 (81.40)
Intervention group (n = 43)
25 (58.14)
16 (37.21)
2 (4.65)
41 (95.35)
χ2/U value
2.391
4.071
P value
0.014
0.044
Table 3 Comparison of the cosmetic appearance between the groups, n (%)
Group
Neatly trimmed cosmetic appearance
Complete coverage
Normal occlusion
Control group (n = 43)
30 (69.77)
29 (67.44)
25 (58.14)
Intervention group (n = 43)
38 (88.37)
37 (86.05)
35 (81.40)
χ2 value
4.497
4.170
5.512
P value
0.034
0.041
0.019
Table 4 Comparison of the dental function between the groups (mean ± SD)
Group
Masticatory function
Swallowing function
Phonic function
Before
After
Before
After
Before
After
Control group (n = 43)
1.91 ± 0.29
3.09 ± 0.43
2.65 ± 0.48
3.63 ± 0.54
2.56 ± 0.98
3.26 ± 0.98
Intervention group (n = 43)
1.98 ± 0.27
3.37 ± 0.49
2.67 ± 0.47
3.86 ± 0.41
2.58 ± 0.59
3.97 ± 0.64
t value
1.154
2.821
0.225
2.255
0.133
4.052
P value
0.252
0.006
0.822
0.027
0.894
0.000
Table 5 Comparison of the implant deviations in the three-dimensional plane between the groups (mean ± SD)
Group
Top (mm)
Middle (mm)
Angle (°)
Control group (n = 43)
1.66 ± 0.97
1.51 ± 0.28
2.95 ± 1.23
Intervention group (n = 43)
0.54 ± 0.34
0.43 ± 0.15
1.78 ± 0.69
t value
7.122
22.295
5.440
P value
0.000
0.000
0.000
Table 6 Comparison of the quality of life between the groups (mean ± SD)
Group
Functional limitation
Physiological pain and discomfort
Psychological and social
Total score
Before
After
Before
After
Before
After
Before
After
Control group (n = 43)
3.70 ± 1.52
1.70 ± 0.96
2.37 ± 1.57
1.21 ± 0.41
3.26 ± 1.54
1.56 ± 0.98
9.33 ± 2.54
4.47 ± 1.32
Intervention group (n = 43)
3.74 ± 1.38
1.21 ± 0.68
2.33 ± 1.32
0.65 ± 0.48
3.21 ± 1.77
1.09 ± 0.75
9.28 ± 2.48
2.95 ± 1.11
t value
0.148
2.721
0.148
5.773
0.130
2.466
0.086
5.755
P value
0.882
0.008
0.882
0.000
0.897
0.016
0.932
0.000
Citation: Yan LB, Zhou YC, Wang Y, Li LX. Orthodontic treatment combined with 3D printing guide plate implant restoration for edentulism and its influence on mastication and phonic function. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(16): 5297-5305