Abstract: Objective: To assess the clinical efficacy of impact air handpiece in exodontia of mandible impact third molars. Methods: 240 impacted mandibular third molars were randomly and equally divided into two groups. Teeth in test group were extracted using impact air handpiece odontotomy and using traditional chisel odontotomy in control group. All statistical analysis were carried out with SPSS 17.0 for Windows． Results: There was significant differences between two groups in extraction time length and complications (P<0.05).  Conclusion: Impact air handpiece demonstrate more benefits than traditional chisels in exodontia of impact mandibular third molars. We thought the method was recommendable.

Key words: mandibular, impacted third molar, impact air handpiece, tooth extraction, complications

摘要： 目的：比较45°仰角冲击式气动手机拔牙法和传统骨凿拔牙法拔除下颌低位阻生智齿的不同临床疗效。方法：将240颗下颌低位阻生智齿随机分为研究组与对照组，分别采用冲击式气动手机拔牙法(研究组)和传统骨凿去骨拔牙法(对照组)拔除。比较两组拔除的手术时间，评价两组术中、术后并发症的发生情况，并进行统计学分析。结果：研究组手术时间比对照组手术时间短(P<0.05)。两组患者术后并发症的发生差异均有统计学意义 (P<0.05)。结论：采用45°仰角冲击式气动手机拔牙法拔除下颌低位阻生智齿的临床效果要优于传统骨凿拔牙法，值得临床推荐。

关键词: 下颌骨；  , 埋伏第三磨牙；  , 冲击式气动手机；  , 拔牙术；  , 并发症

CLC Number: 

• R782.11