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
|
摘要
目的探讨比较传统拔牙技术与微创技术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的效果。方法选择自2017年1月至2018年12月我院收治的200例下颌阻生智齿患者为观察对象,通过数字随机法分为两组,即常规组(n=100)与观察组(n=100),常规组患者应用传统拔牙技术治疗,观察组患者应用微创技术拔牙,对比观察两组间患者在经不同方式拔牙治疗后的效果。结果观察组在治疗后,其手术时间、术中术后并发症及VAS疼痛评分较之常规组更低,两组间相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论对下颌阻生智齿患者采用微创技术拔牙,可缩短治疗时间,减少并发症的发生,治疗安全性更高,值得在临床中推广应用。
Objective To explore the effect of traditional extraction technique and minimally invasive technique in the extraction of mandibular impacted wisdom teeth. Methods A total of 200 patients with mandibular impacted wisdom teeth admitted to our hospital from January 2017 to December 2018 were selected and divided into two groups by the numerical randomization method, namely the conventional group(n =100) and the observation group(n =100), patients in the conventional group were treated with traditional tooth extraction techniques, and patients in the observation group were treated with minimally invasive techniques to extract the teeth. The effect of different extraction methods was compared between the two groups. Results After treatment, the operation time,intraoperative and postoperative complications and VAS pain scores were lower in the observation group than in the conventional group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant(P< 0.05). Conclusion Minimally invasive technique for the extraction of mandibular impacted wisdom teeth can shorten the treatment time,reduce the occurrence of complications, and have higher safety. It is worthy of popularization in clinical practice.
Objective To explore the effect of traditional extraction technique and minimally invasive technique in the extraction of mandibular impacted wisdom teeth. Methods A total of 200 patients with mandibular impacted wisdom teeth admitted to our hospital from January 2017 to December 2018 were selected and divided into two groups by the numerical randomization method, namely the conventional group(n =100) and the observation group(n =100), patients in the conventional group were treated with traditional tooth extraction techniques, and patients in the observation group were treated with minimally invasive techniques to extract the teeth. The effect of different extraction methods was compared between the two groups. Results After treatment, the operation time,intraoperative and postoperative complications and VAS pain scores were lower in the observation group than in the conventional group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant(P< 0.05). Conclusion Minimally invasive technique for the extraction of mandibular impacted wisdom teeth can shorten the treatment time,reduce the occurrence of complications, and have higher safety. It is worthy of popularization in clinical practice.
引文
[1]李军红,才裕涛.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用[J].深圳中西医结合杂志,2016,26(17):95-97.
[1]祝永涛.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用效果[J].中国社区医师,2016,32(8):74-75.
[2]王春伟.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2016,3(16):53,55.
[3]Xu F,Zhang HX.Comparison of minimally invasive extraction and traditional method in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molar[J].Shanghai journal of stomatology,2016,25(5):613.
[4]熊贵发,陈炫霖,王斌.微创拔牙刀结合高速涡轮牙钻拔牙法在下颌近中阻生智齿拔除术中的临床应用效果[J].中国继续医学教育,2016,8(12):93-95.
[5]郑天舒,张喆焱.微创拔牙法与锤凿劈冠法在下颌低位阻生智齿拔除中的效果对比观察[J].中国医药指南,2017,15(27):82-83.
[6]Sardiwalla Y,Jufas N,Morris DP.Direct cost comparison of minimally invasive punch technique versus traditiona approaches for percutaneous bone anchored hearing devices[J].Journal of Otolaryngology-Head&Neck Surgery,2017,46(1):46.
[7]郭红燕.微创拔牙器械和传统拔牙器械在下颌阻生齿拔除术中的临床应用比较[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2016,3(10):11-12,14.
[8]刘学军.下颌阻生智齿拔除中应用微创拔牙术的疗效分析[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2016,3(4):45-46.
[9]Mei U,Yano Y,Suzuki T,et al.Comparison of Glucose Area Under the Curve Measured Using Minimally Invasive Interstitial Fluid Extraction Technology with Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in Diabetic Patients[J].Diabetes&Metabolism Journal,2017,41(4):265-274.
[10]Gong Y,Fu G,Li B,et al.Comparison of the effects of minimally invasive percutaneous pedicle screws osteosynthesis and open surgery on repairing the pain,inflammation and recovery of thoracolumbar vertebra fracture[J].Experimental&Therapeutic Medicine,2017,14(5):4091-4096.
[11]李行健,王进.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用[J].世界临床医学,2017,11(3):181-182.
[12]黄海,赖仁发,冯智强,等.微创拔牙术和传统拔牙术对下颌阻生智齿拔除临床效果及并发症的影响[J].临床医学工程,2017,24(6):805-806.
[13]逄廷洲.微创拔牙技术与传统凿骨劈冠法拔除下颌低位埋伏阻生智齿的临床效果对比[J].影像研究与医学应用,2018,2(1):230-231.
[14]Yuan K,Niu C,Xie Q,et al.Comparative evaluation of the impact of minimally invasive preparation vs.conventiona straight‐line preparation on tooth biomechanics:a finite element analysis[J].European Journal of Ora Sciences,2016,124(6):591.
[15]马嘉平,南晓梅.探讨下颌阻生智齿拔除中微创术的应用疗效研究[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2016,3(6):72,79.
[16]袁金宏.微创与传统拔牙技术拔除下颌低位阻生智齿的临床效果比较[J].基层医学论坛,2017,21(25):3466-3467.
[17]祝永涛.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用效果[J].中国社区医师,2016,32(8):74-75.
[18]任晓艳.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[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2018,18(36):108-109.
[1]祝永涛.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用效果[J].中国社区医师,2016,32(8):74-75.
[2]王春伟.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2016,3(16):53,55.
[3]Xu F,Zhang HX.Comparison of minimally invasive extraction and traditional method in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molar[J].Shanghai journal of stomatology,2016,25(5):613.
[4]熊贵发,陈炫霖,王斌.微创拔牙刀结合高速涡轮牙钻拔牙法在下颌近中阻生智齿拔除术中的临床应用效果[J].中国继续医学教育,2016,8(12):93-95.
[5]郑天舒,张喆焱.微创拔牙法与锤凿劈冠法在下颌低位阻生智齿拔除中的效果对比观察[J].中国医药指南,2017,15(27):82-83.
[6]Sardiwalla Y,Jufas N,Morris DP.Direct cost comparison of minimally invasive punch technique versus traditiona approaches for percutaneous bone anchored hearing devices[J].Journal of Otolaryngology-Head&Neck Surgery,2017,46(1):46.
[7]郭红燕.微创拔牙器械和传统拔牙器械在下颌阻生齿拔除术中的临床应用比较[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2016,3(10):11-12,14.
[8]刘学军.下颌阻生智齿拔除中应用微创拔牙术的疗效分析[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2016,3(4):45-46.
[9]Mei U,Yano Y,Suzuki T,et al.Comparison of Glucose Area Under the Curve Measured Using Minimally Invasive Interstitial Fluid Extraction Technology with Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in Diabetic Patients[J].Diabetes&Metabolism Journal,2017,41(4):265-274.
[10]Gong Y,Fu G,Li B,et al.Comparison of the effects of minimally invasive percutaneous pedicle screws osteosynthesis and open surgery on repairing the pain,inflammation and recovery of thoracolumbar vertebra fracture[J].Experimental&Therapeutic Medicine,2017,14(5):4091-4096.
[11]李行健,王进.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用[J].世界临床医学,2017,11(3):181-182.
[12]黄海,赖仁发,冯智强,等.微创拔牙术和传统拔牙术对下颌阻生智齿拔除临床效果及并发症的影响[J].临床医学工程,2017,24(6):805-806.
[13]逄廷洲.微创拔牙技术与传统凿骨劈冠法拔除下颌低位埋伏阻生智齿的临床效果对比[J].影像研究与医学应用,2018,2(1):230-231.
[14]Yuan K,Niu C,Xie Q,et al.Comparative evaluation of the impact of minimally invasive preparation vs.conventiona straight‐line preparation on tooth biomechanics:a finite element analysis[J].European Journal of Ora Sciences,2016,124(6):591.
[15]马嘉平,南晓梅.探讨下颌阻生智齿拔除中微创术的应用疗效研究[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2016,3(6):72,79.
[16]袁金宏.微创与传统拔牙技术拔除下颌低位阻生智齿的临床效果比较[J].基层医学论坛,2017,21(25):3466-3467.
[17]祝永涛.微创拔牙术在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用效果[J].中国社区医师,2016,32(8):74-75.
[18]任晓艳.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[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2018,18(36):108-109.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |