华西口腔医学杂志

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

2种方法在下颌水平阻生第三磨牙拔除中的比较

李文超 阮宁   

  1. 内蒙古赤峰学院附属医院口腔颌面外科, 内蒙古赤峰024000
  • 收稿日期:2010-02-25 修回日期:2010-02-25 出版日期:2010-02-20 发布日期:2010-02-20
  • 通讯作者: 李文超,Tel:13384768081
  • 作者简介:李文超(1982—),男,内蒙古人,住院医师,硕士

Comparison of two kinds of procedures used in the removal of horizontal impacted mandibular third molars

LI Wen-chao, RUAN Ning   

  1. Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Chifeng College Hospital of Inner Mongolia, Chifeng 024000, China
  • Received:2010-02-25 Revised:2010-02-25 Online:2010-02-20 Published:2010-02-20
  • Contact: LI Wen-chao,Tel:13384768081

摘要:

目的比较舌侧骨板劈开法与高速手机裂钻去骨法拔除下颌低位水平阻生第三磨牙的效果。方法将150颗下颌低位水平阻生第三磨牙随机分成2组, 每组75颗,分别采用舌侧骨板劈开法和高速手机裂钻去骨法拔除,记录手术时间及并发症情况并进行统计学分析。结果舌侧骨板劈开法和高速手机裂钻去骨法拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙的手术时间分别为(35.85±6.05)min和(43.52±7.70)min(P<0.05)。2种手术方法在骨折片去除、面部肿胀方面有统计学差异(P<0.05),在牙龈撕裂、术后疼痛、张口受限、术后出血方面无统计学差异(P>0.05)。2种手术方法术后均未出现舌神经损伤及下唇麻木,高速手机裂钻去骨法发生干槽症1例。结论采用舌侧骨板劈开法拔除下颌低位水平阻生第三磨牙的手术时间短,且术中、术后并发症较少。

关键词: 舌侧骨板劈开法, 高速手机裂钻去骨法, 下颌骨, 阻生第三磨牙

Abstract:

Objective To compare the effect of lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique in the removal of horizontal impacted mandibular third molars. Methods 150 horizontal impacted mandibular third molars were randomly divided into two groups, 75 teeth in each group. One group received lingual split bone technique, while the other group received high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique. Both the operation time and operation complication were compared. Results The operating time with lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique were(35.85±6.05)min and (43.52±7.70)min(P<0.05), respectively. There was significant difference of intraoperative fracture lingual film removal and facial swelling between lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique(P<0.05). While there was no significant difference of gingival laceration, postoperative pain, restriction of mouth opening and postoperative bleed between lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique(P>0.05). There was no lingual nerve injury or numbness of lower lip occurred in two kinds of procedures. Dry socket occurred in a case of high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique. Conclusion Lingual split bone technique is better in the removal of horizontal impacted mandibular third molars. It could shorten operation time and reduce the intraoperative and postoperative complications.

Key words: lingual split bone technique, high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique, mandible, impacted third molar