152例下颌阻生牙两种拔除方法的比较  

COMPARISON OF TWO APPROACHES IN REMOVAL OF IMPACTED MANDIBULAR THIRD MOLARS:152 CASES REPORT

作　　者：古亚兰[1] 赵威[1] 王瑶[1] 

机构地区：[1]泸州医学院附属口腔医院口腔颌面外科,四川泸州646000

出　　处：《泸州医学院学报》2008年第2期173-174,共2页Journal of Luzhou Medical College

摘　　要：目的:探讨涡轮钻法和锤凿法用于拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙的适应证。方法:中、低位水平阻生患者152例。共152颗牙齿,随机分成2组,每组均为阻生齿76颗。一组采用涡轮钻法,一组采用锤凿法。比较2组拔牙花费的时间及术后并发症的严重程度。结果:涡轮转法拔除,最短时间8min,最长时间38min;锤凿法:最短时间10min,最长时间80min.两组间有显著统计学差异(P<0.05)。经标准化后涡轮钻法和锤凿法拔除中、低位阻生齿引起术后并发症发生率分别为38.1%及48.0%。结论:涡轮钻法拔除中、低位阻生齿创伤轻、术后反应小、减少了患者对手术的恐惧感,与传统的锤凿法相比,具有明显的优越性。Objective：To investigate the indication of turbine technique or hammer and chisel technique in removal of impacted mandibular third molars.Methods： 152 impacted mandibular third molars in 152 patients were randomly divided into two treatment groups.One group received turbine technique ,while an other received hammer and chisel technique .Both the duration of operation and complications were compared. Results： The average duration of the operation with turbine technique was （8-38）min,while with hammer and chisel technique was （10-80）min,respectively （P〈0.05）in the removal of impacted mandibular third molars.There were significant differences between two groups .The standardized rate of complication with turbine technique was 38.1% ;while with hammer and chisel technique was 48.0% in the removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Conclusion： Compared with hammer and chisel technique ,turbine technique is more suitable to the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars with minor wound ,less postoperational reaction,and diminishing the fear of patients to operation.

关 键 词：涡轮钻法 锤凿法 阻生齿 拔牙术 

分 类 号：R782.11[医药卫生—口腔医学]