Email Alert | RSS

北京大学学报（医学版） ›› 2021, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (1): 109-119. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2021.01.017

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同垂直骨面型骨性Ⅱ类青少年女性颞下颌关节锥形束CT测量分析

周境,刘怡()   

  1. 北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院,正畸科 国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心 口腔数字化医疗技术和材料国家工程实验室 口腔数字医学北京市重点实验室,北京 100081
  • 收稿日期:2020-09-23 出版日期:2021-02-18 发布日期:2021-02-07
  • 通讯作者: 刘怡 E-mail:lyortho@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    宁夏回族自治区重点研发计划重点项目课题(2018BEG02012)

Cone-beam CT evaluation of temporomandibular joint in skeletal class Ⅱ female adolescents with different vertical patterns

ZHOU Jing,LIU Yi()   

  1. Department of Orthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China
  • Received:2020-09-23 Online:2021-02-18 Published:2021-02-07
  • Contact: Yi LIU E-mail:lyortho@163.com
  • Supported by:
    Key Project of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region Key Research and Development Program(2018BEG02012)

RICH HTML

 20   

PDF (PC)

269

摘要：

目的: 探讨不同垂直骨面型骨性Ⅱ类青少年女性颞下颌关节形态和位置特征。方法: 纳入北京大学口腔医院正畸科初诊拍摄大视野锥形束CT(cone-beam CT,CBCT)的11~14岁女性80例,按照上牙槽座点-鼻根点-下牙槽座点角(subspinale-nasion-supramental angle,ANB)和下颌平面角(Frankfort horizontal plane-gonion-gnathion angle,FH-GoGn)大小分为骨性Ⅰ类均角组(组1,0°≤ANB<4°,22°≤FH-GoGn≤32°),骨性Ⅱ类低角组(组2,ANB≥4°,FH-GoGn<22°)、均角组(组3,ANB≥4°,22°≤FH-GoGn≤32°)和高角组(组4,ANB≥4°,FH-GoGn>32°),每组20例,导入Dolphin软件进行头影测量和关节形态、位置测量。分别使用配对t检验、方差分析和卡方检验比较双侧关节对称性和关节形态及位置的组间差异,采用相关性分析探索骨性Ⅱ类人群头影测量值与关节测量项目间相关关系。结果: (1)关节对称性分析中,四组都存在少量差异有统计学意义的测量项目;组4双侧髁突位置不对称的样本量最多(65%), 其余三组比例相近,但差异无统计学意义。(2)对比组1和组3,关节形态学测量差异无统计学意义;髁突位置组1以前位和中位为主,组3居于后位者明显多于组1(χ2=6.936,P<0.05)。(3)在组2、3、4中,组2关节窝深度最深(H2&4=10.517,P=0.002),关节上间隙(LSD-t2&3=3.408,LSD-t2&4=5.369,P<0.001)、外间隙(LSD-t2&3=2.767,LSD-t2&4=3.350,P=0.001)最大;组4髁突长轴径最小(H2&4=13.374,P<0.001),关节窝垂直距最大(LSD-t2&4=4.561,P<0.001;LSD-t3&4=2.713,P=0.007),关节内间隙(LSD-t2&4=-4.083,P<0.001)、中间隙(LSD-t2&4=-4.201,P<0.001)最小。从组2、组3到组4,后位髁突所占比例逐渐升高。相关性分析显示,ANB与关节前间隙呈显著正相关(r=0.270,P=0.037),与髁突长轴角呈显著负相关(r=-0.296,P=0.022);FH-GoGn与关节上间隙(r=-0.488,P<0.001)、后间隙(r= -0.272,P=0.035)、内间隙(r=-0.390,P=0.002)、中间隙(r=-0.425,P=0.001)、外间隙(r=-0.331,P=0.010)、关节窝深度(r=-0.363,P=0.004)、关节结节后斜面倾斜度(r=-0.259,P=0.046)、髁突长轴径(r=-0.327,P=0.011)呈显著负相关,与关节窝垂直距呈显著正相关(r=0.370,P=0.004)。结论: Ⅱ类矢状骨面型的关节特征主要体现在髁突位置而非关节形态。Ⅱ类不同垂直骨面型关节形态及位置的差异更多地体现在关节间隙以及髁突和关节窝位置,从低角到高角关节窝位置逐渐增高,髁突后位比例逐渐增大。Ⅱ类高角的关节窝位置最高,髁突后位比例最大,关节间隙最小,关节窝深度最浅,髁突长轴径最短,关节不稳定因素最多,在进行正畸治疗时要尤其注意。

关键词: 颞下颌关节, 锥形束计算机体层摄影术, 骨性Ⅱ类, 垂直骨面型, 青少年

Abstract:

Objective: To compare temporomandibular joint (TMJ) morphology and position among skeletal class Ⅱ female adolescents with different vertical patterns using cone-beam CT (CBCT). Methods: Diagnostic CBCT images of 80 female patients aged 11 to 14 years were assessed retrospectively. According to subspinale-nasion-supramental angle (ANB) and Frankfort horizontal plane-gonion-gnathion angle (FH-GoGn), the participants were categorized into four groups (20 subjects each), i.e. class Ⅰ normal angle (group 1, 0°≤ANB<4°, 22°≤FH-GoGn≤32°), class Ⅱ low (group 2, ANB≥4°, FH-GoGn<22°), normal (group 3, ANB≥4°, 22°≤FH-GoGn≤32°) and high angle (group 4, ANB≥4°, FH-GoGn>32°). Cephalometrics, morphology and position of TMJ were measured in Dolphin software. Using paired-samples t test to analyze TMJ symmetry, One-way analysis of variance (One-way ANOVA) and Chi-square tests to detect differences among the groups. The correlations between cephalometrics and TMJ measurements were also analysed within the skeletal class Ⅱ patients.Results: (1) Analysing TMJ morphologic symmetry, some measurements differed statistically although the mean diffe-rences were negligibly relative to their values. No statistically significant difference was found among the groups though group 4 showed the highest probability of condylar position asymmetry (65%). (2) Comparing group 1 with group 3, statistical difference was found in condylar position (χ2=6.936, P<0.05) instead of morphologic measurements. Anterior and concentric condylar position were more frequently observed in group 1, yet posterior position was more prevalent in group 3. (3) In groups 2, 3, and 4, statistically, group 2 had the deepest glenoid fossa depth (H2&4=10.517,P=0.002), biggest superior (LSD-t2&3=3.408, LSD-t2&4=5.369, P<0.001) and lateral (LSD-t2&3=2.767, LSD-t2&4=3.350, P=0.001) joint spaces, whereas group 4 showed the shortest condylar long axis diameter (H2&4=13.374, P<0.001), largest glenoid fossa vertical distance (LSD-t2&4=4.561, P<0.001, LSD-t3&4=2.713, P=0.007), smallest medial (LSD-t2&4=-4.083, P<0.001) and middle (LSD-t2&4=-4.201, P<0.001) joint spaces. The posterior condylar position proportion gradually increased from groups 2 to 3 to 4. Correlation analysis revealed ANB correlated with anterior joint space positively (r=0.270, P=0.037) and condylar long axis angle negatively (r=-0.296, P=0.022). FH-GoGn correlated with superior (r=-0.488, P<0.001), posterior (r= -0.272, P=0.035), mesial (r=-0.390, P=0.002), middle (r=-0.425, P=0.001), and lateral (r=-0.331, P=0.010) joint spaces, articular eminence inclination (r=-0.259, P=0.046), as well as condylar long axis diameter (r=-0.327, P=0.011) negatively, and glenoid fossa depth (r=0.370, P=0.004) positively. Conclusion: TMJ characteristics of skeletal class Ⅱ sagittal pattern mainly reflected in condylar position rather than morphology. TMJs of different vertical patterns differed more in joint spaces, position of condyle and glenoid fossa than in morphologic measurements. Vertical position of glenoid fossa and proportion of posterior condyle increased gradually from hypodivergent to hyperdivergent. Highest glenoid fossa position, maximum ratio of posterior positioned condyle, smallest joint spaces, shallowest glenoid fossa depth, and narrowest condylar long axis diameter were found in skeletal class Ⅱ high angle group, which means that patients with this facial type have considerable joint instable factors, and we should especially pay attention when orthodontic treatment is carried out on them.

Key words: Temporomandibular joint, Cone-beam computed tomography, Skeletal class Ⅱ, Vertical skeletal pattern, Adolescent

中图分类号: 

  • R783.5

图1

a:眶耳平面与水平面平行;b:正中矢状面通过ANS点和Ba点"

图2

头颅侧位投影面及定点、测量项目"

图3

下颌升支矢状投影面及定点、测量项目"

图4

髁突最大轴面及定点、测量项目"

图5

髁突中心矢状面(a)和冠状面(b)"

图6

关节窝中心点的确定及垂直距离的测量(a,b);中心矢状面上定位冠状面,使其通过S点(c);轴状面上关节窝冠状距及矢状距的测量(d)"

表1

各组样本年龄及头影测量分布"

Variable Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
Age/months, x-±s 154.20±10.07 152.55±12.70 153.20±12.03 151.65±11.47
ANB/(°), x-±s 2.51±1.01#△§ 4.98±0.89*§ 5.43±1.21* 6.36±1.48*#
FH-GoGn/(°), x-±s 26.18±2.10△§ 19.47±2.74*△§ 27.06±2.20#§ 33.71±1.89*#△

表2

各组左右侧关节配对t检验(右-左, x-±s)"

Measurements Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
Condylar length/mm -0.72±1.30* -0.10±1.35 -0.29±1.50 -0.31±1.45
Condylar height/mm -0.50±1.12 -0.12±1.38 -0.22±1.36 -0.51±1.43
Condylar neck inclination/(°) 1.88±4.17 -0.91±4.20 1.72±3.67* -0.60±3.90
Condylar head angle/(°) -1.51±7.10 -2.23±11.13 -1.95±12.44 -4.60±9.72*
Anterior joint space/mm -0.04±0.40 -0.16±0.46 -0.26±0.47* -0.21±0.49
Superior joint space/mm -0.08±0.47 -0.12±0.55 0.03±0.36 -0.01±0.70
Posterior joint space/mm 0.11±0.38 0.01±0.38 0.13±0.42 0.16±0.60
Glenoid fossa width/mm -0.11±1.96 0.45±1.23 0.41±1.37 -0.18±1.36
Glenoid fossa depth/mm 0.14±0.92 0.06±0.64 0.24±0.72 -0.27±0.74
Articular eminence inclination/(°) 3.16±8.46 -4.24±7.55* -3.01±6.28* -6.40±7.84*
Mesial joint space/mm -0.07±0.52 -0.11±0.55 0.10±0.55 -0.06±0.51
Middle joint space/mm -0.14±0.63 -0.02±0.60 0.02±0.54 -0.43±0.63*
Lateral joint space/mm -0.05±0.68 -0.09±0.52 -0.07±0.74 -0.03±0.62
Condylar long axis diameter/mm 0.05±1.12 0.36±0.95 0.22±1.50 -0.04±1.53
Condylar short axis diameter/mm 0.10±0.56 0.35±0.82 0.30±0.75 0.23±0.87
Glenoid fossa vertical distance/mm -0.15±0.95 -0.13±0.88 0.77±0.87** 0.00±0.75
Glenoid fossa coronal distance/mm 1.22±2.32* 1.73±2.37* 1.11±1.86* 1.25±2.04*
Glenoid fossa sagittal distance/mm -0.31±1.95 0.69±1.36* 0.22±1.16 0.27±2.21
Condylar long axis angle/(°) -0.19±7.56 -2.58±4.59* -1.53±7.25 -0.98±7.44

表3

各组髁突位置对称性分析[侧(%)]"

Condylar position Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
Symmetrical 10 (50) 13 (65) 12 (60) 7 (35)
Asymmetrical 10 (50) 7 (35) 8 (40) 13 (65)

表4

各组关节测量项目差异(x-±s)"

Measurements Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
Condylar length/mm 17.30±1.92 17.16±2.43 17.40±2.46 17.39±1.77
Condylar height/mm 16.48±1.76 16.39±2.42 16.54±2.39 16.63±1.76
Condylar neck inclination/(°) 73.48±6.07 73.23±6.01 72.46±4.95 73.99±6.47
Condylar head angleks/(°) 151.56±7.96 154.12±13.95 150.99±9.54 154.26±10.15
Anterior joint space/mm 1.55±0.56 1.71±0.40 1.56±0.54 1.82±0.60
Superior joint space/mm 2.23±0.63# 2.91±0.77*△§ 2.38±0.64# 2.07±0.74#
Posterior joint space/mm 1.65±0.48 1.68±0.48 1.54±0.42 1.49±0.46
Glenoid fossa width/mm 17.35±2.08 17.41±1.52 1.54±0.42 17.07±1.78
Glenoid fossa depthks/mm 6.62±1.33 7.37±1.03§ 6.85±0.96 6.50±1.15#
Articular eminence inclination/(°) 49.62±11.76 53.24±9.09 51.47±8.46 49.43±11.34
Mesial joint space/mm 2.11±0.62# 2.50±0.74*§ 2.24±0.60 1.91±0.62#
Middle joint space/mm 2.26±0.72 2.61±0.73§ 2.33±0.67 1.94±0.73#
Lateral joint space/mm 2.09±0.61 2.34±0.52△§ 1.96±0.66# 1.88±0.66#
Condylar long axis diameterks/mm 16.99±2.61 17.37±1.76§ 16.47±1.85 15.54±2.51#
Condylar short axis diameter/mm 7.73±1.01 7.85±1.14 7.53±0.89 7.55±1.00
Glenoid fossa vertical distance/mm 2.63±1.42# 1.53±1.36*§ 2.09±1.27§ 2.90±1.32#*
Glenoid fossa coronal distance/mm 49.02±2.44 48.56±1.87 48.74±2.08 48.59±2.40
Glenoid fossa sagittal distanceks/mm 9.65±3.12 9.60±3.11 10.16±2.09 9.67±2.76
Condylar long axis angleks/(°) 68.24±8.43 68.15±5.38 67.36±7.72 65.79±9.03

表5

骨性Ⅱ类颞下颌关节测量项目与头影测量指标的相关性分析"

Variables ANB (n=60) FH-GoGn (n=60)
r P r P
Condylar length -0.245 0.059 0.091 0.491
Condylar height -0.228 0.080 0.091 0.487
Condylar neck inclination 0.074 0.572 0.038 0.771
Condylar head angle 0.143 0.275 -0.024 0.853
Anterior joint space 0.270 0.037* 0.037 0.778
Superior joint space -0.145 0.270 -0.488 <0.001**
Posterior joint space -0.196 0.133 -0.272 0.035*
Glenoid fossa width -0.114 0.386 -0.101 0.443
Glenoid fossa depth -0.130 0.321 -0.363 0.004**
Articular eminence inclination 0.120 0.363 -0.259 0.046*
Mesial joint space -0.149 0.256 -0.390 0.002**
Middle joint space -0.144 0.271 -0.425 0.001**
Lateral joint space -0.115 0.383 -0.331 0.010*
Condylar long axis diameter -0.154 0.240 -0.327 0.011*
Condylar short axis diameter -0.240 0.065 -0.143 0.276
Glenoid fossa vertical distance 0.161 0.220 0.370 0.004**
Glenoid fossa coronal distance 0.050 0.706 0.051 0.697
Glenoid fossa sagittal distance -0.170 0.193 -0.163 0.214
Condylar long axis angle -0.296 0.022* -0.211 0.105

表6

各组髁突位置分布 [侧(%)]"

Condylar position Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
Anterior 11 (27.5) 4 (10.0) 14 (35.0) 6 (15.0)
Concentric 22 (55.0) 25 (62.5) 11 (27.5) 16 (40.0)
Posterior 7 (17.5) 11 (27.5) 15 (37.5) 18 (45.0)
[1] Bjork A. Facial growth in man, studied with the aid of metallic implants[J]. Acta Odontol Scand, 1955,13(1):9-34.
doi: 10.3109/00016355509028170 pmid: 14398173
[2] Copray JC, Dibbets JM, Kantomaa T. The role of condylar cartilage in the development of the temporomandibular joint[J]. Angle Orthod, 1988,58(4):369-380.
pmid: 3061315
[3] Weinberg LA. Correlation of temporomandibular dysfunction with radiographic findings[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 1972,28(5):519-539.
doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(72)90064-9 pmid: 4507574
[4] Ahn SJ, Lee SJ, Kim TW. Orthodontic effects on dentofacial morphology in women with bilateral TMJ disk displacement[J]. Angle Orthod, 2007,77(2):288-295.
pmid: 17319764
[5] McNamara JA Jr. Components of class Ⅱ malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age[J]. Angle Orthod, 1981,51(3):177-202.
doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1981)051<0177:COCIMI>2.0.CO;2 pmid: 7023290
[6] Simmons 3rd HC, Oxford DE, Hill MD. The prevalence of skeletal Class Ⅱ patients found in a consecutive population presenting for TMD treatment compared to the national average[J]. J Tenn Dent Assoc, 2008,88(4):16-18.
pmid: 19248341
[7] Lin M, Xu Y, Wu H, et al. Comparative cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of temporomandibular joint position and morphology in female patients with skeletal class Ⅱ malocclusion[J]. J Int Med Res, 2019,48(2):0300060519892388.
[8] Hasebe A, Yamaguchi T, Nakawaki T, et al. Comparison of condylar size among different anteroposterior and vertical skeletal patterns using cone-beam computed tomography[J]. Angle Orthod, 2019,89(2):306-311.
doi: 10.2319/032518-229.1 pmid: 30475648
[9] Ma Q, Bimal P, Mei L, et al. Temporomandibular condylar morphology in diverse maxillary-mandibular skeletal patterns: A 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography study[J]. J Am Dent Assoc, 2018,149(7):589-598.
doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2018.02.016 pmid: 29655707
[10] Pullinger A, Hollender L. Variation in condyle-fossa relationships according to different methods of evaluation in tomograms[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1986,62(6):719-727.
doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(86)90270-7 pmid: 3467295
[11] Ocak M, Sargon MF, Orhan K, et al. Evaluation of the anatomical measurements of the temporomandibular joint by cone-beam computed tomography[J]. Folia Morphol, 2019,78(1):174-181.
[12] Tsiklakis K, Syriopoulos K, Stamatakis HC. Radiographic examination of the temporomandibular joint using cone beam computed tomography[J]. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 2004,33(3):196-201.
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/27403192 pmid: 15371321
[13] Firetto MC, Abbinante A, Barbato E, et al. National guidelines for dental diagnostic imaging in the developmental age[J]. Radiol Med, 2019,124(9):887-916.
doi: 10.1007/s11547-019-01038-4 pmid: 31055724
[14] Bjork A. Variations in the growth pattern of the human mandible: Longitudinal radiographic study by the implant method[J]. J Dent Res, 1963,42(1):400-411.
[15] Lobo F, Tolentino ES, Iwaki LCV, et al. Imaginology tridimensional study of temporomandibular joint osseous components according to sagittal skeletal relationship, sex, and age[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2019,30(5):1462-1465.
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000005467 pmid: 31299744
[16] Al-koshab M, Nambiar P, John J. Assessment of condyle and glenoid fossa morphology using CBCT in South-East Asians[J]. PLoS One, 2015,10(3):e0121682.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121682 pmid: 25803868
[17] Coombs MC, She X, Brown T R, et al. Temporomandibular joint condyle-disc morphometric sexual dimorphisms independent of skull scaling[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2019,77(11):2245-2257.
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2019.04.022 pmid: 31125537
[18] Weinberg LA. Role of condylar position in TMJ dysfunction-pain syndrome[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 1979,41(6):636-643.
doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(79)90062-3 pmid: 286056
[19] 葛胜将. 不同骨性错牙合患者髁突形态及位置的CBCT研究[D]. 青岛: 青岛大学, 2015.
[20] 韩晓利. 成年女性骨性Ⅱ错牙合不同垂直骨面型患者TMJ骨性结构特征的CBCT研究[D]. 天津: 天津医科大学, 2017.
[21] 崔燕, 唐天琪, 刘琳. 不同矢状骨面型患者颞下颌关节形态特征锥形束CT研究[J]. 中国实用口腔科杂志, 2016,9(6):348-353.
[22] Saccucci M, Polimeni A, Festa F, et al. Do skeletal cephalometric characteristics correlate with condylar volume, surface and shape? A 3D analysis[J]. Head Face Med, 2012,8:15.
doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-8-15 pmid: 22587445
[23] Katayama K, Yamaguchi T, Sugiura M, et al. Evaluation of mandibular volume using cone-beam computed tomography and correlation with cephalometric values[J]. Angle Orthod, 2014,84(2):337-342.
doi: 10.2319/012913-87.1 pmid: 23985034
[24] Paknahad M, Shahidi S, Abbaszade H. Correlation between condylar position and different sagittal skeletal facial types[J]. J Orofac Orthop, 2016,77(5):350-356.
doi: 10.1007/s00056-016-0039-z pmid: 27357584
[25] Nielsen IL. Vertical malocclusions: etiology, development, diagnosis and some aspects of treatment[J]. Angle Orthod, 1991,61(4):247-260.
doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1991)061<0247:VMEDDA>2.0.CO;2 pmid: 1763835
[26] Droel R, Isaacson RJ. Some relationships between the glenoid fossa position and various skeletal discrepancies[J]. Am J Orthod, 1972,61(1):64-78.
doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(72)90177-7 pmid: 4500188
[27] Costa EDD, Peyneau PD, Roque-Torres GD, et al. The relationship of articular eminence and mandibular fossa morphology to facial profile and gender determined by cone beam computed tomography[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol, 2019,128(6):660-666.
doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2019.07.007 pmid: 31494114
[28] Kurusu A, Horiuchi M, Soma K. Relationship between occlusal force and mandibular condyle morphology. Evaluated by limited cone-beam computed tomography[J]. Angle Orthod, 2009,79(6):1063-1069.
doi: 10.2319/120908-620R.1 pmid: 19852595
[29] Burke G, Major P, Glover K, et al. Correlations between condylar characteristics and facial morphology in Class Ⅱ preadolescent patients[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998,114(3):328-336.
doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70216-1 pmid: 9743139
[30] 李晨. 不同垂直骨面型骨性Ⅱ类成年女性颞下颌关节骨性结构的三维分析[D]. 西安: 第四军医大学, 2016.
[31] Goymen M, Gulec A. Effects of the vertical malocclusion types on the dimension of the mandibular condyle[J]. Turk J Orthod, 2017,30(4):106-109.
doi: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2017.17029 pmid: 30112501
[32] 车蓓, 张昊, 钱才梅, 等. 不同垂直骨面型安氏Ⅱ类1分类错牙合患者颞下颌关节三维形态结构的比较[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2014,49(7):399-402.
[33] Celik S, Celikoglu M, Buyuk SK, et al. Mandibular vertical asymmetry in adult orthodontic patients with different vertical growth patterns: A cone beam computed tomography study[J]. Angle Orthod, 2016,86(2):271-277.
doi: 10.2319/030515-135.1 pmid: 26065465
[34] Kikuchi K, Takeuchi S, Tanaka E, et al. Association between condylar position, joint morphology and craniofacial morphology in orthodontic patients without temporomandibular joint disorders[J]. J Oral Rehabil, 2003,30(11):1070-1075.
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01194.x pmid: 14641670
[35] Paknahad M, Shahidi S. Association between condylar position and vertical skeletal craniofacial morphology: a cone beam computed tomography study[J]. Int Orthod, 2017,15(4):740-751.
doi: 10.1016/j.ortho.2017.09.008 pmid: 29111128
[36] Park IY, Kim JH, Park YH. Three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography based comparison of condylar position and morphology according to the vertical skeletal pattern[J]. Korean J Orthod, 2015,45(2):66-73.
doi: 10.4041/kjod.2015.45.2.66 pmid: 25798412
[1] 陈曼曼,杨招庚,苏彬彬,李艳辉,高迪,马莹,马涛,董彦会,马军. 中山市儿童青少年青春期身高生长突增规律[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(3): 506-510.
[2] 杨雪,孙伟,王哲,姬爱平,白洁. 儿童和青少年牙外伤急诊患者临床分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 384-389.
[3] 韩玮华,罗海燕,郭传瑸,宁琦,孟娟红. 软骨寡聚基质蛋白在颞下颌关节滑膜软骨瘤病中的表达[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 34-39.
[4] 罗冬梅,闫晓晋,胡佩瑾,张京舒,宋逸,马军. 1990—2010年中国女性早婚和生育的地区不平等性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(3): 479-485.
[5] 陈硕,贺洋,安金刚,张益. 计算机辅助设计虚拟颌位在儿童颞下颌关节强直合并颌骨畸形同期矫治中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(5): 954-958.
[6] 陶春燕,李红霞,李雪迎,唐朝枢,金红芳,杜军保. 体位性心动过速综合征儿童及青少年在直立试验中血流动力学变化[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(3): 414-421.
[7] 李明哲,王晓霞,李自力,伊彪,梁成,何伟. 计算机导航辅助下口内入路髁突切除术精确性分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(1): 182-186.
[8] 王怡然，周彦恒，王雪东，魏松，刘伟涛. 上颌反复扩缩前方牵引三维变化的锥形束CT分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(4): 685-693.
[9] 董彦会，宋逸，董彬，邹志勇，王政和，杨招庚，王西婕，李艳辉，马军. 2014年中国7~18岁学生血压状况与营养状况的关联分析——基于中国儿童青少年血压评价标准[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(3): 422-428.
[10] 陈天麒，董彬，张文静，高迪思，董彦会，马军，马迎华. 儿童青少年睡眠时间与速度和耐力成绩的相关性研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(3): 429-435.
[11] 李昕，王欣，吴迪，陈智滨，王梦醒，高艳霞，巩纯秀，秦满. 青少年糖尿病患者血浆及龈沟液中白细胞介素-1β和C反应蛋白水平[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(3): 538-542.
[12] 王丹丹，甘业华，马绪臣，孟娟红. ADAMTS14基因单核苷酸多态性与汉族女性颞下颌关节骨关节炎的相关性研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(2): 279-283.
[13] 王楠，赵玉鸣. 62例残障儿童及青少年在全身麻醉下牙齿治疗的回顾性研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(2): 293-299.
[14] 董彦会，王政和，杨招庚，王西婕，陈妍君，邹志勇，马军. 2005年至2014年中国7~18岁儿童青少年营养不良流行现状及趋势变化分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(3): 424-432.
[15] 宋逸，胡佩瑾，董彦会，张冰，马军. 2014年全国各省、自治区、直辖市汉族学生视力不良现况分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(3): 433-438.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 赵磊, 王天龙 . 右心室舒张末期容量监测用于肝移植术中容量管理的临床研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2009, 41(2): 188 -191 .
[2] 万有, , 韩济生, John E. Pintar. 孤啡肽基因敲除小鼠电针镇痛作用增强[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2009, 41(3): 376 -379 .
[3] 张燕, 韩志慧, 钟延丰, 王盛兰, 李玲玲, 郑丹枫. 骨骼肌活组织检查病理诊断技术的改进及应用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2009, 41(4): 459 -462 .
[4] 林红, 王玉凤, 吴野平. 学校生活技能教育对小学三年级学生行为问题影响的对照研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(3): 319 -322 .
[5] 丰雷, 程嘉, 王玉凤. 注意缺陷多动障碍儿童的运动协调功能[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(3): 333 -336 .
[6] 李岳玲, 钱秋瑾, 王玉凤. 儿童注意缺陷多动障碍成人期预后及其预测因素[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(3): 337 -340 .
[7] 牟向东, 王广发, 刁小莉, 阙呈立. 肺黏膜相关淋巴组织型边缘区B细胞淋巴瘤一例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(4): 346 -350 .
[8] 韩金涛, 赵军, 栾景源, 张龙. 多发结核性腹主动脉瘤一例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(4): 361 -364 .
[9] 燕太强, 杨荣利, 郭卫, 沈丹华. 胫骨平滑肌肉瘤伴全身多发骨转移一例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(4): 369 -373 .
[10] 常杏芝, 卢红梅, 张月华, 秦炯. 以高血压与红斑肢痛为主要表现的汞中毒一例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2007, 39(4): 377 -380 .
ISSN 1671-167X
CN 11-4691/R
主管单位：中华人民共和国教育部
主办单位：北京大学
地址： 北京市海淀区学院路38号 北京大学医学部 《北京大学学报（医学版）》
邮编：100191
电话：010-82801551
Email： xbbjb2@bjmu.edu.cn

《北京大学学报（医学版）》
微信公众号
版权所有 © 2018 《北京大学学报（医学版）》编辑部