Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ›› 2021, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (32): 5178-5183.doi: 10.12307/2021.221
Previous Articles Next Articles
Wei Hui, Zhang Chao, Zhang Wenzhong#br#
Received:
2020-10-12
Revised:
2020-10-15
Accepted:
2020-11-26
Online:
2021-11-18
Published:
2021-07-26
Contact:
Zhang Wenzhong, Chief physician, Department of Orthodontics, Stomatological Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China
About author:
Wei Hui, Master, Physician, Department of Orthodontics, Stomatological Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China
Supported by:
CLC Number:
Wei Hui, Zhang Chao, Zhang Wenzhong. Optimizing the ratio of buccal gallery: a consideration on the therapeutic effect from a three-dimensional and multi-level perspective[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(32): 5178-5183.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks
2.1 颊廊的概念及测量方法 颊廊又称颊旁间隙,是指人微笑时上颌牙列两侧口角与最后一颗可见牙的远中颊边缘之间的黑色区域[9],从正面观,相对皎白的牙齿颊廊呈黑色或较暗的间隙,因此也被称为“负性间隙”[10]。目前测量颊廊的方法有3种:第一,直接测量颊廊的直线距离,由于每张照片的放大倍数不同,该法不能精确计算颊廊的线性距离;第二,颊廊宽度比率法,即左右颊廊宽度总和/笑容宽度(微笑时双侧口角之间的距离),采用比率可有效降低因照片放大倍数不一致而引起的误差,该法被广泛应用于研究中[11];第三,颊廊面积比率法,即微笑时双侧颊廊区的面积/微笑区面积(微笑时下唇上缘与上唇下缘之间的面积),由于颊廊实际上是正面微笑的三维呈现,且照片的放大倍数不完全相同,使用颊廊面积比率能更精确地衡量颊廊区的大小,从而最大限度地减少误差[12-13],见图2。 "
2.2 影响颊廊审美的因素 2.2.1 背景文化、种族和地域 背景文化、种族和地域是影响个人审美判断的重要因素。HOUMAN等[14]比较不同种族和文化的外行人士对颊廊变化的可接受阈值,研究结果表明,在伊斯坦布尔和德黑兰无法确定颊廊变化的可接受阈值,然而,伊斯法罕和芝加哥的这一比例为20%,罗马为40%,大不里士、多哈和亚兹德为10%,提示不同城市的个人审美偏好存在差异,文化和种族会显著影响个人的审美判断。另有报道,NIMBALKAR等[15]比较中国人、马来西亚人、印度人对颊廊的美学认知,发现印度人比中国人和马来西亚人评估更为苛刻;中国人认为颊廊比率为22%的短面型者微笑最美观协调,而马来西亚人、印度人则认为颊廊比率为10%的短面型者微笑更具吸引力[15]。而在另一项研究中,ALMANEA等[16]发现,沙特阿拉伯人认为颊廊较宽时,微笑更具吸引力,提出人们对微笑吸引力的感知受社会背景和自身经历的影响。 2.2.2 年龄和性别 DESAI等[17]研究显示,随着年龄的增长,微笑空间变化特征呈纵向上变窄,横向上变宽,颊廊逐渐增大。此外GROVER等[18]研究发现,患者的面部生长型不同,其增龄性变化特征亦不一致,在水平生长型中,颊廊等横向指标逐渐增大,而切牙牙冠和相关牙龈暴露量等纵向指标却减小,反之亦然。ALPER等[19]运用图片编辑软件调整照片中颊廊的大小,并使用视觉模拟量表来评估每幅图像的美学价值,得出男、女性最具有吸引力的颊廊分别为4%和12%,男性的最美颊廊较女性的最美颊廊小,提示对于男性,拥有饱满的笑容更具吸引力。NURFITRAH等[20]研究发现,评估者的性别不影响颊廊审美,而SADRHAGHIGHI等[21-22]报道性别对颊廊的美学评价有一定的影响,女性评估者较男性评估者评价更为严苛,这可能与女性更注重细节有关。观察到性别差异对微笑美学评价的影响,将有助于临床中的诊断和治疗方案的制定。 2.2.3 专业知识及时代变迁 专业知识及时代变迁与颊廊的审美密切相关。AL-SALEH等[23]研究发现, 随着临床经验和知识的增加,口腔医学专业的学生诊断微笑美学差异的能力将得到改善和增强,临床培训对美容评估具有实质性的积极影响。而AL TAKI等[24]指出,正畸医生更青睐Hollywood微笑 (颊廊消失),而非正畸口腔医生将伴宽大颊廊的微笑作为首选,普通大众则更喜欢伴中等宽度颊廊的微笑(颊廊比率为10%)。而在另一项研究中,GAIKWAD等[16,25-27]发现,与非正畸口腔医生和普通大众相比,正畸医生更易感知颊廊的变化,更青睐有宽大牙弓的饱满笑容,这可能与他们的专业训练、矫治理念有关。另有报道,由于互联网、媒体杂志的影响,人们对美的感知相互渗透和影响,将趋向于一致[2,6,28-29],例如从20世纪60年代提出的微笑时只显露6颗前牙的含蓄之美,到如今大多数学者青睐的伴宽大牙弓的“饱满”微笑。 2.2.4 垂直骨面型 垂直骨面型与颊廊的审美密切相关。NIMBALKAR等[15]指出,虽然普通大众和正畸医生更青睐饱满的微笑(颊部间隙<2%),然而对于短面型者,颊廊较大时(10%),微笑更具吸引力。短面型者颊廊太小,在视觉上将夸大面部横向的不平衡;长面型者颊廊过大,在视觉上将加重面部垂直向的不平衡,破坏面部的宏观美学;均面型者则可以较好地适应颊廊改变引起的美学变化。以上提示正畸医生在设计矫治方案时,应协调好颊廊与垂直骨面型的关系,为患者塑造和谐美丽的微笑,取得最佳的美学效果。 2.3 影响颊廊大小的因素 2.3.1 垂直骨面型 三维方向上的骨面型与颊廊有着密不可分的关系。MOLLABASHI等[28,30]发现,垂直骨面型与颊廊呈负相关,长面型者往往具有较小的颊廊,这可能是由于在垂直方向上的高度增加,导致微笑时下唇的活动度大于上唇,垂直向动度增加,水平向动度减少,故颊廊变小。此外,FARZANEGAN等[31]研究表明:随着下面高的增加,颊旁区趋于减小,颊廊与下颌平面角呈显著的负相关性,其原因可能为微笑时下唇的活动度大于上唇。正畸医生矫治前应正确评估患者的面部生长型,避免垂直向高度变化对颊廊造成的不利影响。综上所述,正畸医生在制定治疗计划和方案时应考虑患者的面型,对低角型患者的颊廊调整范围可适当放宽,而对高角型患者的颊廊调整则需谨慎。 2.3.2 牙弓宽度和微笑宽度 牙弓宽度和微笑宽度与颊廊的大小密切相关。AKYALCIN等[32-33]研究结果表明,颊廊的大小与牙弓宽度呈负相关,窄小的牙弓通常伴随较大的颊廊,在微笑宽度一定的前提下,内倾、狭窄的上颌牙弓,正面观横向投影不足,颊廊随之增大。TURATTI等[34]研究发现,上颌骨位置后移,上颌牙弓较宽的部分相对于口角处于更后位,从正面观,上牙弓的横向宽度投影不足,颊廊比率增加;而当上颌骨位置前移,上颌牙弓后部较宽的部分相对于口角往前移位,占据更大的口腔前庭空间,从正面观,微笑时上颌牙弓显露量增多,颊廊比率变小[33]。TEJA等[35]对上颌发育不足的骨性Ⅲ类患者采用快速扩弓和前方牵引矫治,矫治后的颊廊减小,颊旁区面积与ANB呈负相关;上颌骨前后向发育不足的患者,随着上颌骨前移,颊廊将减小,提示正畸医师在制定矫治方案前应评估患者牙弓宽度和微笑宽度,对上颌发育不足的患者可采用扩弓加前方牵引,以优化颊廊比率,改善正面微笑美观。 2.3.3 前牙唇倾度 前牙唇倾度与颊廊的大小密切相关。CHENG等[11] 提出,对于垂直生长型患者,上切牙和下切牙的唇倾度越大,上切牙在微笑时暴露量越多,颊廊比率越小, 此可能与上下中切牙的代偿机制密切相关,垂直生长型患者的生长型一般表现为开张离散型,其口周肌肉的活动度较大,但口周肌肉运动和肌力特征仍有待于深入研究和探讨[36]。SIDDIQUI等[18,37]进一步研究发现,U1的暴露量、U1与面平面的角度,L1-NB距,L1与下颌平面的角度与颊廊大小均呈负相关的趋势,表明上颌前牙向前和向下移位、下前牙向前和向上移位越多,颊廊越小,提示在正畸矫治过程中,可通过建立前牙正常的覆牙合覆盖,改善颊廊的大小,从而有效塑造微笑美。 2.3.4 口周肌肉张力 国内外最新研究表明,口周肌肉的张力、上下唇的形态和运动度与颊廊的大小密切有关。DESAI等[7,17,32]研究发现,随着患者年龄的增长,其口周肌肉发生增龄性变化,颊廊呈逐渐增大的趋势,提示正畸医师在遵循专业治疗原则的基础上,在矫治过程中需结合不同个体、不同年龄阶段的面部肌肉增龄性变化特征,制定个性化符合各个年龄阶段的治疗方案。HATROM等[33]指出,安式Ⅱ1类错牙合患者拔牙矫治后,上下前牙被内收,上唇的突度减少,卷曲的上唇和异常紧张的颏部软组织得到改善,上唇张力降低,口周软组织形态得以协调,当微笑时,嘴唇的横向动度增加,微笑的宽度增大,颊廊随之增大,提示在临床中,正畸矫治前应评估患者的牙弓宽度、微笑宽度及口周肌肉张力,综合协调三者之间的关系,科学合理地制定矫治方案;在矫治过程中,应加强对口唇、舌部等正畸相关肌肉的功能训练,使唇部的曲度更加美观协调,有效改善患者的微笑宽度,优化颊廊比例,充分、自然地显露微笑,以充分提升患者微笑美程度。 2.4 颊廊的大小对正畸微笑美学的影响 目前,学者们关于颊廊的大小对微笑美学的影响仍然存在争议,这可能与颊廊的测量方法不同,且无统一客观的评价标准有关。MOLLABASHI等[28]将受试者的上颌骨后牙列进行数字化改造,以产生一系列的微笑丰满度:窄(28%颊廊)、中(15%颊廊)和宽型(2%颊廊);用视觉模拟法对每种微笑的总体吸引力和可接受性进行评分,结果表明正畸医师和普通口腔医师更青睐狭窄的颊廊,认为较宽的微笑(较小的颊廊)更具吸引力。另外,正畸医生和外行人均偏爱较窄小的颊廊,而不喜欢宽阔的颊 廊[16,28]。与此同时,窄小的颊廊也被各种种族所接受,成为具有吸引力的微笑的特征[15]。临床医生在制定治疗计划和设定治疗目标时,应将较大的颊廊间隙列入问题清单,考虑笑容的差异,以确保患者取得最佳疗效和提升满意度[16]。然而,在AKYALCIN等[26,32,38]的研究中,尚未发现颊廊大小与微笑美学之间的相关性。另有报道指出,印度的正畸医师认为伴随窄小的颊廊是重要的美学特征,而非专业人士对颊廊的变化不敏锐和严格[24],此与AL TAKI等[24]的观点一致。来自阿拉伯东部地区的牙齿矫正医生得出结论:当颊廊消失或者颊廊为中等宽度时,笑容更具吸引力,但相较于正畸医生,普通口腔医生和非专业人士不易感知颊廊的变化,提示颊廊并不是影响微笑吸引力的关键因素[24,26,39-40]。另有报道,SADRHAGHIGHI等[16,21]研究发现,普通大众和正畸医生均偏向于有宽大牙弓的饱满微笑,即尽量窄小的颊廊(显露至第1磨牙的近中表面,但并未完全消失)。与此同时,MOLLABASHI等[28]发现,正畸医师和普通口腔医师对颊廊的审美达成一致,即较小的颊廊使正面微笑更协调美观。综上所述,目前学者们普遍认为,较窄小的颊廊给人以更饱满、自然的笑容,当颊廊系数超过20%时,将对正面微笑美观产生不利影响[41]。 "
[1] JOANA G, PERES GR, LUIS J. Contribution of facial components to the attractiveness of the smiling face in male and female patients: A cross-sectional correlation study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020;157(1):98-104. [2] PARRINI S, ROSSINI G, CASTROFLORIO T, et al. Laypeople’s perceptions of frontal smile esthetics: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016;150(5):740-750. [3] JANSON G, BRANCO NC, FERNANDES TM, et al. Influence of orthodontic treatment, midline position, buccal corridor and smile arc on smile attractiveness. Angle Orthod. 2011;81(1):153-161. [4] MANJULAWS, SUKUMAR MR, KISHOREKUMAR S, et al. Smile: A review. J Pharm BioalliedSci. 2015;7(Suppl 1):S271-275. [5] NIAKI EA, ARAB S, SHAMSHIRI A, et al. The effect of the buccal corridor and tooth display on smile attractiveness. AustOrthod J. 2015;31(2): 195-200. [6] GURGELJA, PINZAN-VERCELINO CRM, LEON-SALAZAR V. Maxillary and mandibular dentoalveolar expansion with an auxiliary beta-titanium arch. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017;152(4):543-552. [7] BAEK ES, HWANG S, KIM KH, et al. Total intrusion and distalization of the maxillary arch to improve smile esthetics. Korean J Orthod. 2017; 47(1):59-73. [8] CHENG HC, CHENG PC. Factors affecting smile esthetics in adults with different types of anterior overjet malocclusion. Korean J Orthod. 2017; 47(1):31-38. [9] FAUS-MATOSES V, FAUS-MATOSES I, RUIZ-BELL E, et al. Severe tetracycline dental discoloration: Restoration with conventional feldspathic ceramic veneers. A clinical report. J Clin Exp Dent. 2017; 9(11):e1379-e1382. [10] CHRISTOU T, BETLEJ A, ASWAD N, et al. Clinical effectiveness of orthodontic treatment on smile esthetics: a systematic review. Clin CosmetInvestig Dent. 2019;11:89-101. [11] CHENG HC, WANG YC. Effect of nonextraction and extraction orthodontic treatments on smile esthetics for different malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018;153(1):81-86. [12] HANDELMAN CS, BALAKRISHNAN M, BEGOLE EA, et al. Bimaxillary transverse constriction in adults: Short-term follow-up of non-surgical arch expansion. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2020;23(2):202-209. [13] MEYER AH, WOODS MG, MANTON DJ. Maxillary arch width and buccal corridor changes with orthodontic treatment. Part 2: attractiveness of the frontal facial smile in extraction and nonextraction outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;145(3):296-304. [14] HOUMAN S A, AFSANEH Z, SHAHRZAD S, et al. Esthetic preferences of laypersons of different cultures and races with regard to smile attractiveness. Indian J Dent Res. 2017;28(2):156-161. [15] NIMBALKAR S, OH YY, MOK RY, et al. Smile attractiveness related to buccal corridor space in 3 different facial types: A perception of 3 ethnic groups of Malaysians. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(2):252-256. [16] ALMANEA R, MODIMIGH A, ALMOGREN F, et al. Perception of smile attractiveness among orthodontists, restorative dentists, and laypersons in Saudi Arabia. J ConservDent. 2019;22(1):69-75. [17] DESAI S, UPADHYAY M, NANDA R. Dynamic smile analysis: changes with age. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop. 2009;136(3):310.e1-10; discussion 310-311. [18] GROVER N, KAPOOR DN, VERMA S, et al. Smile analysis in different facial patterns and its correlation with underlying hard tissues. Prog Orthod. 2015;16:28. [19] ALPER A, SERDAR AB, ERMAN C, et al. Smile Attractiveness: Differences among the Perceptions of Dental Professionals and Laypersons. Turk J Orthod. 2017;30(2):50-55. [20] NURFITRAH A, CHRISTNAWATI C, ALHASYIMI AA. Comparison of esthetic smile perceptions among male and female Indonesian dental students relating to the buccal corridors of a smile. Dental Journal: Majalah Kedokteran Gigi. 2017;50(3):127-130. [21] SADRHAGHIGHI AH, ZARGHAMI A, SADRHAGHIGHI S, et al. Esthetic preferences of laypersons of different cultures and races with regard to smile attractiveness. Indian J Dent Res. 2017;28(2):156-161. [22] ALHAMMADI MS, HALBOUB E. Perception of facial, dental, and smile esthetics by dental students. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018;30(5):415-426. [23] AL-SALEH SA, AL-SHAMMERY DA, AL-SHEHRI NA, et al. Awareness of Dental Esthetic Standards Among Dental Students and Professionals. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2019;11:373-382. [24] AL TAKI A, KHALESI M. Perceptions of Altered Smile Esthetics: A Comparative Evaluation in Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypersons. Int J Dent. 2016;2016:7815274. [25] GAIKWAD S, KAUR H, VAZ AC, et al. Influence of Smile Arc and Buccal Corridors on Facial Attractiveness: A Cross-sectional Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(9):Zc20-zc23. [26] SADRHAGHIGHI H, ZARGHAMI A, SADRHAGHIGHI S, et al. Esthetic perception of smile components by orthodontists, general dentists, dental students, artists, and laypersons. J Investig Clin Dent.2017;8(4).doi: 10.1111/jicd.12235. [27] K P S, RUCHI A, VIKRAM B, et al. Perception of Buccal Corridor Space on Smile Aesthetics among Specialty Dentist and Layperson. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2019;9(5):499-504. [28] MOLLABASHI V, ABOLVARDI M, AKHLAGHIAN M, et al. Smile attractiveness perception regarding buccal corridor size among different facial types. Dent Med Probl. 2018;55(3):305-312. [29] RAJEEV AN, VINOTH S, NAGALAKSHMI S, et al. Evaluation of buccal corridor sizes in esthetic smile perception among general dentists and laypersons. Journal of Indian Academy of Dental Specialist Researchers, 2018;5(1).doi:10.4103/jiadsr.jiadsr_4_18. [30] DEMIR R, BAYSAL A. Three-dimensional evaluation of smile characteristics in subjects with increased vertical facial dimensions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020;157(6):773-782. [31] FARZANEGAN F, HEARVI F, KARRARI M, et al. Changes in smile morphometric indices following maxillary advancement and mandibular setback surgery in skeletal Class III patients. Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science. 2019;18(2).doi:10.3329/bjms.v18i2.40688 [32] AKYALCIN S, MISNER K, ENGLISH JD, et al. Smile esthetics: Evaluation of long-term changes in the transverse dimension. Korean J Orthod. 2017;47(2):100-107. [33] HATROM AA, AFIFY AR, HASSAN AH. Nonsurgical Orthodontic Intervention of a Severe Class II Case Accompanied by Posterior Crossbite Using a Miniscrew-Assisted Straight Wire Technique. Case Rep Dent. 2019;2019:5696370. [34] TURATTI G, BRUNI A. Maxillomandibular Transverse Osteodistraction: A Multidisciplinary Case Report with 30-Month Follow-Up. Case Rep Dent. 2020;2020:3856412. [35] TEJA P, TEJA S, NAYAK R, et al. Correction of transverse maxillary deficiency and anterior open bite in an adult Class III skeletal patient. APOS Trends in Orthodontics. 2016;6(3). doi:10.4103/2321-1407.183156 [36] LI H, CAO T, ZHOU H, et al. Lip position analysis of young women with different skeletal patterns during posed smiling using 3-dimensional stereophotogrammetry. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019;155(1): 64-70. [37] SIDDIQUI N, TANDON P, SINGH A, et al. Dynamic smile evaluation in different skeletal patterns. Angle Orthod. 2016;86(6):1019-1025. [38] ELHINY OA, HARHASH AY. Buccal Corridors: A Fact or a Myth in the Eyes of Laymen?. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2016;4(4):700-704. [39] PRASAD KN, SABRISH S, MATHEW S, et al. Comparison of the influence of dental and facial aesthetics in determining overall attractiveness. IntOrthod. 2018;16(4):684-697. [40] AMRITA G, KUMAR BJ, MOHAMMED A, et al. Perception of general dentists and laypersons towards altered smile aesthetics. J Orthod Sci. 2019;8:14. [41] EMMERICH O P L, ANDREA M, MATHEUS P, et al. Details of pleasing smiles. Int J Esthet Dent. 2018;13(4):494-514. [42] MENDES L M, JANSON G, ZINGARETTIJUNQUEIRA-MENDES CH, et al. Long-term profile attractiveness in Class II Division 1 malocclusion patients treated with and without extractions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019;155(3):362-371. [43] CHENG HC, WANG YC, TAM KW, et al. Effects of tooth extraction on smile esthetics and the buccal corridor: A meta-analysis. J Dent Sci. 2016;11(4):387-393. [44] YAN Y, TIAN Z. Maxillary arch width and buccal corridor changes with orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;146(2): 135-136. [45] SHOOK C, KIM SM, BURNHEIMER J. Maxillary arch width and buccal corridor changes with Damon and conventional brackets: A retrospective analysis. Angle Orthod. 2016;86(4):655-660. [46] TERPSITHEA C, ANNA B, NAJD A, et al. Clinical effectiveness of orthodontic treatment on smile esthetics: a systematic review. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2019;11:89-101. [47] CHRISTOU T, ABARCA R, CHRISTOU V, et al. Smile outcome comparison of Invisalign and traditional fixed-appliance treatment: A case-control study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020;157(3):357-364. [48] ATIK E, AKARSU-GUVEN B, KOCADERELI I, et al. Evaluation of maxillary arch dimensional and inclination changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets using broad archwires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016;149(6):830-837. [49] CELIKOGLU M, BAYRAM M, NUR M, et al. Mandibular changes during initial alignment with SmartClip self-ligating and conventional brackets: A single-center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Korean J Orthod. 2015;45(2):89-94. [50] XU H, HAN X, WANG Y, et al. Effect of buccolingual inclinations of maxillary canines and premolars on perceived smile attractiveness. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(2):182-189. [51] MOURA W, BELLINI-PEREIRA SA, COTRIN-SILVA PP, et al. Buccal corridor changes for improvement of smile esthetics. J Clin Orthod. 2020;54(2):111-120. |
[1] | Tang Haotian, Liao Rongdong, Tian Jing. Application and design of piezoelectric materials for bone defect repair [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2023, 27(7): 1117-1125. |
[2] | Xu Qijing, Yang Yichun, Lei Wei, Yang Ying, Yu Jiang, Xia Tingting, Zhang Meng, Zhang Tao, Zhang Qian. Advances and problems in cell-free treatment of diabetic skin chronic wounds [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2023, 27(6): 962-969. |
[3] | Wu Yujie, Wan Xiaofang, Wei Mianxing, Peng Shiyuan, Xu Xiaomei. Correlation between autophagy and the Hippo-YAP protein pathway in periodental ligament cells on the pressure side of a mouse model of orthodontic tooth movement [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2023, 27(5): 683-689. |
[4] | Jiang Haifang, Liu Rong, Hu Peng, Chen Wei, Wei Zairong, Yang Chenglan, Nie Kaiyu. Application of 3D printing technology in the precise and personalized treatment of cleft lip and palate [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2023, 27(3): 413-419. |
[5] | Liu Wenwen, Cui Zhanqin, Liu Yingqi. Systematic review of the research progress of nickel-titanium arch wires for orthodontics [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2023, 27(16): 2556-2562. |
[6] | Sun Xiaotong, Cheng Yi, Bi Lan, Wang Huida. Effect of parathyroid hormone and parathyroid hormone-related peptides on tissue remodeling during orthodontics [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2023, 27(14): 2234-2241. |
[7] | Zhang Min, Bai Shulin, Li Shenghong, Fan Zhibo, Xie Yijia, Xu Xiaomei. Effects of high mobility group box 1 and ERK1/2 pathway on autophagy of human periodontal ligament cells under tensile stress [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2023, 27(10): 1560-1566. |
[8] | Chen Xiaoxu, Luo Yaxin, Bi Haoran, Yang Kun. Preparation and application of acellular scaffold in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2022, 26(4): 591-596. |
[9] | Shen Jiahua, Fu Yong. Application of graphene-based nanomaterials in stem cells [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2022, 26(4): 604-609. |
[10] | Chen Lin, Xu Xiaomei, Zhang Li, Xu Pengfei, Zheng Qian. Finite element study on the effect of canine distal movement on anterior tooth intrusion by clear aligners [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2022, 26(35): 5669-5675. |
[11] | Ding Xue, Jia Ying, Liu Chun, Yang Shirong, Lai Lingyan, Yang Hua, Ding Qi. Displacement and rate changes of orthodontic tooth movement in Sprague-Dawley rats with chronic fluorosis [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2022, 26(29): 4687-4692. |
[12] | Liu Ke, Fan Haixia, Wang Hong, Cheng Huanzhi, Geng Haixia. Expression and significance of collagen fiber and matrix metalloproteinase-9 during orthodontic root resorption in rats [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2022, 26(27): 4288-4292. |
[13] | Wan Zhe, Du Jun, He Jing, Hu Yang. Effect of Gushukang on osteogenic differentiation in a Beagle dog model during orthodontic root resorption and its mechanism [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2022, 26(17): 2654-2659. |
[14] | Cheng Yi, Liu Ting, Guo Yujing, Sun Xiaotong, Bi Lan, Zhang Ronghe. Effect of estrogen on bone remodeling and root resorption during orthodontics [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2022, 26(17): 2782-2788. |
[15] | Gu Yueguang, Shen Jianhuan, Ni Jieli, Guo Shuyu, Yan Zhongyi, Zhang Yang. Effect of osteogenesis in patients with alveolar cleft after bone grafting investigated by volume analysis [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2022, 26(10): 1501-1504. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||