期刊文献+

涡轮机分牙法与去骨法拔除男性下颌阻生第三磨牙的对比

Comparative study of turbine tooth separation and turbine bone abrasion for extraction of impacted mandibular third molar in men
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的比较涡轮机分牙法与去骨法对下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除术后反应的差异,为这类患牙的拔除方式选择提供参考。方法选择门诊患者68位,共82颗患牙,随机分为两组,一组采用分牙法,另一组采用去骨法,每组41颗患牙。分牙法组使用涡轮机分牙法拔除患牙;去骨法组使用涡轮机去骨法拔除患牙。比较两组手术时间、术后疼痛、面部肿胀及张口受限程度的情况。结果分牙法组手术时间为(23.5±6.4)min,而去骨法组手术时间为(16.5±3.3)min,两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);分牙法组术后疼痛及术后肿胀方面症状均轻于去骨法组,差别有统计学意义(P<0.01);术后张口受限方面分牙法组和去骨法组比较,无统计学差别。结论两种方法各有利弊,涡轮机分牙法可明显减轻术后疼痛和肿胀症状,但手术时间较长。 Objective To analyze the difference between turbine tooth separation method and turbine bone abrasion method for removal of mesioangular impacted mandibular third molar, providing reference for clinical preoperative design.Methods A total of 82 teeth from 68 outpatients were randomly divided into two groups, one group was treated by tooth separation method, the other group by bone abrasion method 41 teeth in each group.Tooth separation method group underwent turbine tooth separation;and the other group underwent turbine bone abrasion.Operation time, postoperative pain, swelling in the face and limitation of mouth opening degree were compared between the two groups.Results Compared with bone abrasion group (16.5 ±3.3) min, the operation time in tooth sepa-ration group(23.5 ±6.4)min was longer significantly (P〈0.01).The postoperative pain in tooth separation group was lighter than in bone abrasion group, with significant difference (P〈0.01).The swelling after operation in tooth separation group was lighter than in bone abrasion group, with significant difference (P〈0.01).For limitation of mouth opening degree, both groups had no significant difference.Conclusions Using the turbine tooth separation method for extraction of impacted mandibular third molar can significantly reduce postoperative pain and swelling, but the operation time is longer than in the turbine bone abrasion method.
作者 雒云 欧阳东
出处 《武警医学》 CAS 2015年第3期286-288,共3页 Medical Journal of the Chinese People's Armed Police Force
关键词 下颌阻生第三磨牙 涡轮机 分牙法 去骨法 impacted mandibular third molar turbine tooth separation method bone abrasion method
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献36

  • 1胡秀莲,林野,于海燕,崔宏燕.种植暂时修复体在上颌前牙种植美学修复中软组织处理技术[J].中国口腔种植学杂志,2012,17(1):18-19. 被引量:34
  • 2张雪洋,胡飞,朱安棣,余燕玲.Luxator微创拔牙刀的临床研究[J].国际医药卫生导报,2007,13(2):20-22. 被引量:22
  • 3Levitt D. Atraumatic extraction and root retrieval using the periotome: a precursor to immediate placement of dental implants[J]. Dent Today,2001,20 (11):53-57.
  • 4Erten H, Akarslan ZZ, Bodrumlu E. Dental fear and anxiety levels of patients attending a dental clinic [J]. Quintessence Int, 2006,37(4):304-310.
  • 5Buchanan H, Niven N. Further evidence for the validity of the Facial Image Scale[J]. Int J Paediatr Dent, 2003,13(5): 368-369.
  • 6Casap N, Alterman M, Sharon G, et al. The effect of informed consent on stress levels associated with extraction of impacted mandibular third molars[J]. J Oral Maxiilofac Surg, 2008,66(5):878-881.
  • 7Akadiri OA, Obiechina AE. Assessment of difficulty in third molar surgery --a systematic review[J]. J Oral Maxiilofae Surg, 2009,67(4):771-774.
  • 8Shoben EJ Jr, Borland L. An empirical study of the etiogy of dental fears[J]. J Clin Psychol, 1954,10(2):171-174.
  • 9de Jongh A, Olff M, van Hoolwerf H, et al. Anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptoms following wisdom tooth removal[J]. Behav Res Ther, 2008,46(12):1305-1310.
  • 10Voegelin TC. Suter VG, Bomstein MM. Complications during and after surgical removal of mamdibular third molars. Impact of patient related and anatomical factors [J]. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed,2008,118(3): 192-198.

共引文献40

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部