|
|
|
| Clinical application effect of minimally invasive tooth extraction and traditional tooth extraction in patients with mandibular impacted wisdom teeth extraction |
| QIN Wen-long |
| Department of Stomatology, Chengdu Women′s and Children′s Central Hospital, Sichuan Province, Chengdu 610074,China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective To explore the clinical application effect of minimally invasive tooth extraction and traditional tooth extraction in patients with mandibular impacted wisdom teeth extraction.Methods A total of 124 patients with mandibular impacted wisdom teeth extraction who were admitted to Chengdu Women′s and Children′s Central Hospital from November 2018 to December 2019 were selected as the research subjects.They were divided into two groups according to the admission sequence by odd-even grouping method.The odd numbers were the reference group (62 cases,62 teeth) and the even numbers were the study group (62 cases, 62 teeth).Patients in the reference group were treated with traditional tooth extraction, and in the study group, minimally invasive tooth extraction was used.After tooth extraction, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, mouth opening restriction rating, tooth extraction duration, and the total incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.Results The VAS score of the study group after tooth extraction was lower than that of the reference group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).The degree of mouth opening restriction of the study group was milder than that in the reference group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).The total extraction time of the study group was shorter than that of the reference group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).The total incidence of intraoperative complications in the study group was lower than that in the reference group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).The total incidence of postoperative complications in the study group was lower than that in the reference group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).Conclusion In the extraction of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth, minimally invasive tooth extraction obtains a more prominent clinical effect than traditional tooth extraction in regardless of significant reduction in the occurrenceboth intraoperative and postoperative complications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
孙文波.分析微创拔牙技术拔除下颌低位埋伏阻生智齿临床价值[J].全科口腔医学杂志（电子版），2020，7（5）：48，56.
|
| [2] |
辛世鹏，刘俊红.传统法与超声骨刀微创拔牙法拔除阻生智齿的效率，创伤和术后并发症比较与研究[J].全科口腔医学杂志（电子版），2019，6（25）：6-8.
|
| [3] |
王珊珊.微创拔牙法在下颌近中阻生智齿拔除术中的临床效果观察[J].全科口腔医学杂志（电子版），2020，7（3）：116-117.
|
| [4] |
罗丽华，田剑敏，吴列红.涡轮机联合微创拔牙器械与传统拔牙器械在下颌低位阻生智齿拔除术中的临床比较[J].浙江创伤外科，2018，23（5）：932-933.
|
| [5] |
黄娜.微创拔牙术与传统拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用效果对比观察[J].全科口腔医学杂志（电子版），2019，6（4）：96-97.
|
| [6] |
郑光华，黄金钗，彭丽端.微创拔牙术应用于下颌阻生智齿拔除的临床效果研究[J].中国现代医生，2019，57（36）：69-71，76.
|
| [7] |
韩阳.涡轮机联合微创拔牙器械与传统拔牙器械在下颌低位阻生智齿拔除术中的临床比较分析[J].中国医疗器械信息，2019，25（16）：83-84.
|
| [8] |
黄薇.用微创拔牙器械对下颌阻生智齿患者进行下颌阻生智齿拔除术的效果探讨[J].当代医药论丛，2019，17（21）：36-38.
|
| [9] |
潘锋.微创拔牙术与传统拔牙术对智齿拔除患者疼痛程度及并发症的影响对比[J].基层医学论坛，2019，23（32）：4660-4661.
|
| [10] |
饶秀珍，黄金花，郭方，等.微创拔牙刀与传统拔牙在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的效果对比及对患者疼痛症状的影响[J].实用临床护理学电子杂志，2020，5（17）：121.
|
| [11] |
王明.微创拔牙法在下颌近中阻生智齿拔除术中的临床应用[J].临床医药文献电子杂志，2020，7（19）：64，71.
|
| [12] |
曾柳.微创拔牙器械和传统拔牙器械在下颌阻生齿拔除术中的应用效果比较[J].中国当代医药，2019，26（32）：138-140.
|
| [13] |
付新国，王丽.传统拔牙技术与微创技术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的效果比较探讨[J].智慧健康，2019，5（13）：52-54.
|
| [14] |
唐臣.探讨微创拔牙术与传统拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的比较研究[J].中国保健营养，2019，29（20）：121.
|
| [15] |
孙飞.下颌阻生智齿实施微创拔牙术的有效性与安全性[J].河南医学高等专科学校学报，2020，32（1）：62-63.
|
|
|
|
