摘要: 目的:比较不同分冠法的两种高速涡轮机拔牙方法的临床应用效果,并与传统劈冠法进行比较。方法:对210颗下颌阻生第三磨牙(186例),进行随机分组,每组70颗牙。A组:“T+V”型涡轮机分牙冠加C型颈部增隙法;B组:T型涡轮机分牙冠法;C组:传统劈冠分牙增隙法。观察拔牙时间、拔牙术中并发症、术后反应。结果:3组中,A组拔牙时间平均(26.14±0.78) min,B组拔牙时间平均(34.53±0.52) min,C组拔牙时间平均(41.57±0.62) min。3组间比较(P<0.05),差异有统计意义。A组术后疼痛和术后肿胀均较B组、C组低(P<0.05),但术后张口受限以及术后感染在3组间无差异(P>0.05)。A组术中断根、舌侧骨板U折断发生率较B组、C组低(P<0.05)。3组间,术中明显出血、下齿槽神经损伤的发生率,差异无统计意义(P>0.05)。结论:高速涡轮机配专用长裂钻或球钻进行阻生牙拔除术,采用“T+V”型分冠结合C型颈部去骨法,拔牙时间较短,术中断根率、舌侧骨板折断率较低,术后疼痛、肿胀较少。
关键词:
下颌阻生第三磨牙,
牙拔除术,
高速涡轮机,
分牙方法,
并发症
Abstract: Objective: To compare the clinical effects of 3 different techniques in the practice of impacted mandibular third molar surgery. Methods: 210 impacted mandibular third molars(186 patients provided informed consent) were divided into 3 groups. Group A used“T+V” shape of cutting crown by high speed turbine handpiece, combining with“C” type of cervical increasing gap to extract the impacted mandibular third molars. Group B used “T”shape of dividing crown. Group C used dental chisel to split the impacted molar for coronectomy. The operative time length, intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded and compared. Results: The operation time length in group A was statistically shorter than those in group B and group C (P<0.05). Furthermore, postoperative pain, swelling, broken roots and fracture of lingual plate of group A, were also lower (P<0.05). But the clinical complications such as trismus, hemorrhage, infection, and damage of alveolar nerve showed no differences between three groups. Conclusion: Extractions of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth, with the method of “T+V” shape coronetomy combining with cervical “C” increasing gaps, may be more benefits.
Key words:
impacted mandibular third molar,
extraction,
high speed air turbine,
crown cutting method,
complications
中图分类号:
梁荣奇,余飞. 不同方式分冠法拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙的临床观察[J]. 《口腔颌面外科杂志》, 2015, 25(4): 300-303.
LIANG Rong-qi, YU Fei. A Comparison between Different Coronetomy Techniques in Impacted Third Molar Extraction[J]. 《Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery》, 2015, 25(4): 300-303.