微创拔牙法与传统拔牙法在下颌阻生齿拔除术中的效果比较

摘要
图/表
参考文献(15)
相关文章 (2)

全文: PDF (0 KB) HTML (31 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的探讨微创拔牙法与传统拔牙法在下颌阻生齿拔除术中的不同效果。方法选取2017年1～12月我院收治的100例下颌阻生齿患者作为研究对象，采用随机数字表法将其分为对照组（50例）和观察组（50例）。对照组患者采用传统拔牙法治疗，观察组患者采用高速涡轮钻微创拔牙法治疗，比较两组患者的张口受限程度、手术时间、拔牙完整性、患者疼痛程度以及并发症发生情况。结果观察组患者的拔牙完整性高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05），观察组患者的手术时间明显短于对照组，张口受限度、肿胀程度明显弱于对照组，并发症发生率明显低于对照组，差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论高速涡轮钻微创拔牙法运用于下颌阻生齿拔除术能降低患者痛苦，提高拔牙完整性，有利于患者康复。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	刘晓兵
	陈勉

关键词 ：高速涡轮钻, 微创拔牙, 下颌阻生齿, 张口受限

Abstract：Objective To investigate the different effects of minimally invasive extraction and traditional tooth extraction in the extraction of mandibular impacted tooth.Methods A total of 100 patients with mandibular impacted teeth who were admitted to our hospital from January to December 2017 were selected as study subjects.They were divided into control group(50 cases)and observation group(50 cases)by random number table method.The control group was given traditional tooth extraction.The observation group was given minimally invasive extraction by high-speed turbine drilling.The degree of mouth opening restriction,operation time,tooth extraction integrity,patients′pain degree and complications were compared between the two groups.Results The integrity of tooth extraction in the observation group was higher than that in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).The operation time in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group,the mouth opening restriction and the swelling degree were significantly weaker than those in the control group,the incidence rate of complications was significantly lower than that in the control group,and the differences were statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion The minimally invasive tooth extraction by high-speed turbine drilling for mandibular impacted tooth extraction can reduce the patients′pain,improve the integrity of tooth extraction,and is more conducive to patients′recovery.

Key words： High-speed turbo drill Minimally invasive extraction Mandibular impacted teeth Mouth opening restriction

基金资助:广东省云浮市医药卫生科研立项项目（2018B64）

作者简介: 刘晓兵（1984-），男，本科，主治医师，研究方向：微创拔牙

引用本文:

刘晓兵；陈勉. 微创拔牙法与传统拔牙法在下颌阻生齿拔除术中的效果比较[J]. 中国当代医药, 2019, 26(17): 118-120.
LIU Xiao-bing； CHEN Mian. Effect comparison of minimally invasive extraction and traditional tooth extraction in the extraction of mandibular impacted tooth. 中国当代医药, 2019, 26(17): 118-120.

链接本文:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/CN/ 或 http://dangdaiyiyao.com/CN/Y2019/V26/I17/118

[1]	徐芳，张慧霞.微创拔牙法与传统拔牙法拔除下颌阻生智牙疗效比较[J].上海口腔医学，2016，25（5）:613-616.
[2]	杨映阳，杜胜男，吕宗凯.高速涡轮机头和微创拔牙刀在下颌阻生牙拔除术中的应用效果评价[J].上海口腔医学，2015，24（4）:489-492.
[3]	徐锦程，赵莉莉，王艳，等.微创拔牙法与锤凿劈冠法在下颌低位阻生智齿拔除中的效果比较[J].蚌埠医学院学报，2013，38（4）:395-396.
[4]	张志刚.微创技术在拔除下颌低位埋伏阻生智齿中的应用[J].安徽医药，2015，12（4）:723-725.
[5]	黄呈森.高速涡轮钻微创法与传统凿骨劈冠法在低位埋伏下颌阻生智齿拔除中的临床效果[J].河北医学，2015，22（6）:968-970.
[6]	翟敏，吴益鸣，蔡建英.下颌双侧低位近中阻生第三磨牙微创与传统拔除的对照研究[J].口腔颌面外科杂志，2016，26（2）:119-123.
[7]	韩新生，明华伟，李龙江.高速涡轮机法与增隙经舌侧法在下颌阻生齿拔除术中的效果对比[J].西部医学，2016，28（11）:1549-1552.
[8]	韦宁.反角高速涡轮牙钻截冠法与锤凿劈冠法拔除下颌阻生智齿的临床效果比较[J].浙江医学，2015，37（20）:1687-1689.
[9]	梁清军.两种方法拔除下颌阻生智齿的效果比较[J].口腔颌面外科杂志，2015，25（3）:195.
[13]	高丽，张斌，齐慧妮，等.微创拔牙术应用于下颌阻生智齿拔除的临床总结[J].现代口腔医学杂志，2016，30（2）:112-113.
[14]	辜义陆，缪克红，杨凤.下颌中低位阻生齿的微创拔除疗效观察[J].中国医药导报，2017，14（1）：53-56.
[15]	林展葱.微创拔牙法拔除下颌近中阻生牙生理微创的观察[J].中国医药科学，2018，8（18）：251-253.
[10]	Siroraj AP，Giri GVV，Ramkumar S，et al.Extraction of impacted mandibular third molars-the effect of osteotomy at two speeds on peripheral bone：a histopathological analysis[J].Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg，2016，54（4）：449-453.
[11]	Koyuncu B，Lu M，Tetik A.Effect of tube drainage compared with conventional suturing on postoperative discomfort after extraction of impacted mandibular third molars[J].Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg，2015，53（1）：63-67.
[12]	Uyan1k LO，Bilginaylar K，Etikan I.Effects of platelet-rich fibrin and piezosurgery on impacted mandibular third molar surgery outcomes[J].Head Face Med，2015，11（1）：25.