|
|
|
| Comparative study of turbine tooth separation and turbine bone abrasion for extraction of impacted mandibular third molar in men |
| LUO Yun, OYANG Dong |
| Department of Stomatology, Beijing Municipal Corps Hospital of Chinese People’s Armed Police forces, Beijing 100027, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective To analyze the difference between turbine tooth separation method and turbine bone abrasion method for removal of mesioangular impacted mandibular third molar, providing reference for clinical preoperative design. Methods A total of 82 teeth from 68 outpatients were randomly divided into two groups, one group was treated by tooth separation method, the other group by bone abrasion method 41 teeth in each group. Tooth separation method group underwent turbine tooth separation; and the other group underwent turbine bone abrasion. Operation time, postoperative pain, swelling in the face and limitation of mouth opening degree were compared between the two groups. Results Compared with bone abrasion group (16.5±3.3) min, the operation time in tooth separation group(23.5±6.4)min was longer significantly (P<0.01). The postoperative pain in tooth separation group was lighter than in bone abrasion group, with significant difference (P<0.01). The swelling after operation in tooth separation group was lighter than in bone abrasion group, with significant difference (P<0.01). For limitation of mouth opening degree, both groups had no significant difference. Conclusions Using the turbine tooth separation method for extraction of impacted mandibular third molar can significantly reduce postoperative pain and swelling, but the operation time is longer than in the turbine bone abrasion method.
|
|
Received: 18 November 2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
张震康, 俞光岩. 口腔颌面外科学[M]. 北京: 北京大学医学出版社, 2007:121-122.
|
| [2] |
董建辉,朱亚琴.下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度的影响因素分析[J].上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2014, 34(2):254-256.
|
| [3] |
Susarla S, Dental T B. Estimating third molar extraction difficulty [J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2005, 63(2): 427-434.
|
| [1] |
张震康, 俞光岩. 口腔颌面外科学[M]. 北京: 北京大学医学出版社, 2007:121-122.
|
| [2] |
董建辉,朱亚琴.下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除难度的影响因素分析[J].上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2014, 34(2):254-256.
|
| [4] |
耿温琦. 下颌阻生智齿[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 1992: 115-179.
|
| [3] |
Susarla S, Dental T B. Estimating third molar extraction difficulty [J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2005, 63(2): 427-434.
|
| [5] |
邱蔚六, 张震康. 口腔颌面外科学 [M]. 5版. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2003: 4-5.
|
| [6] |
Kilpatrick H C. Removal of impacted third molar Utilizing speed up to 200,000 y.p.m [J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1958, 11(4): 364-369.
|
| [4] |
耿温琦. 下颌阻生智齿[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 1992: 115-179.
|
| [5] |
邱蔚六, 张震康. 口腔颌面外科学 [M]. 5版. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2003: 4-5.
|
| [6] |
Kilpatrick H C. Removal of impacted third molar Utilizing speed up to 200,000 y.p.m [J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1958, 11(4): 364-369.
|
| [7] |
王 旭,王 健,王 锐. 急性年轻恒前牙脱位两种固定方法的临床对比研究[J]. 中国急救复苏与灾害医学杂志, 2014,9(7):650-652.
|
| [7] |
王 旭,王 健,王 锐. 急性年轻恒前牙脱位两种固定方法的临床对比研究[J]. 中国急救复苏与灾害医学杂志, 2014,9(7):650-652.
|
| [8] |
雷荣昌, 黎 钢, 马文涛, 等. 高速涡轮机去冠法在下颌近中阻生智齿拔除中的临床应用[J]. 口腔颌面外科杂志, 2009, 19(6): 404-407.
|
| [8] |
雷荣昌, 黎 钢, 马文涛, 等. 高速涡轮机去冠法在下颌近中阻生智齿拔除中的临床应用[J]. 口腔颌面外科杂志, 2009, 19(6): 404-407.
|
| [9] |
Levitt D. Atraumatic extraction and root retrieval using the periotome: a precursor to immediate placement of dental implants [J]. Dent Today, 2001, 20(11): 53-57.
|
| [9] |
Levitt D. Atraumatic extraction and root retrieval using the periotome: a precursor to immediate placement of dental implants [J]. Dent Today, 2001, 20(11): 53-57.
|
| [10] |
谭 荣,胡冬梅,李静茹. 临时冠对上颌单颗前牙即刻种植义齿周围软组织成形的影响[J]. 中国急救复苏与灾害医学杂志,2014,9(8):759-661.
|
| [10] |
谭 荣,胡冬梅,李静茹. 临时冠对上颌单颗前牙即刻种植义齿周围软组织成形的影响[J]. 中国急救复苏与灾害医学杂志,2014,9(8):759-661.
|
| [1] |
. [J]. Med. J. Chin. Peop. Armed Poli. Forc., 2016, 27(10): 1071-1072. |
|
|
|
|
2015, Vol. 26 
