超声骨刀结合高速涡轮机与传统凿骨劈冠法拔除下颌困难阻生智齿的效果比较

摘要
图/表
参考文献(20)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (0 KB) HTML (44 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的比较超声骨刀结合高速涡轮机与传统凿骨劈冠法拔除下颌困难阻生智齿的效果。方法选取2017年1月～2018年10月我院收治的120 例下颌困难阻生智齿患者作为研究对象，按照随机数字表法将其分为观察组（n=60）和对照组（n=60）。观察组患者采用超声骨刀结合高速涡轮机治疗，对照组患者采用传统凿骨劈冠法治疗。比较两组患者的手术一般情况（手术时间、术中出血量），于术中及术后2、7 d 时运用视觉模拟量表（VAS）评价两组患者的疼痛程度，并于术后2 d 时评估术区肿胀程度和张口受限程度，同时统计两组术后并发症发生情况。结果观察组患者的手术时间短于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；观察组患者的术中出血量少于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。观察组患者术中及术后2、7 d 时的VAS 评分均低于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。观察组患者术后2 d 时术区肿胀程度、张口受限程度均轻于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。观察组患者的术后并发症总发生率低于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论与传统凿骨劈冠法相比，超声骨刀结合高速涡轮机在拔除困难阻生智齿方面具有微创、高效、安全等优势。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	陈刚
	蒋立辉
	吴萍
	刘聪慧
	蓝翔

关键词 ：超声骨刀, 高速涡轮机, 传统凿骨劈冠法, 困难阻生智齿, 术区肿胀程度, 张口受限程度, 安全性

Abstract：Objective To compare the effect between ultrasonic bone knife combined with high speed turbine and traditional bone chisel crown method in the extraction of difficult impacted wisdom teeth of jaw. Methods A total of 120 patients with difficult impacted wisdom teeth of jaw admitted to our hospital from January 2017 to October 2018 were selected as the research objects, and they were divided into the observation group (n=60) and the control group (n=60)according to the random number table method.The observation group was treated with ultrasonic bone knife combined with high speed turbine, while the control group was treated with traditional bone chisel and crown method.The general conditions of surgery (operation time, amount of intraoperative blood loss) of the two groups of patients were compared,and the visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the pain degree of the two groups of patients during the operation and at 2 and 7 days after the operation.At the same time, the degree of swelling and the restriction degree of mouth opening were evaluated, and the incidence of postoperative complications of the two groups was counted. Results The operation time of the observation group was shorter than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).The amount of intraoperative blood loss in the observation group was less than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).The VAS scores of the observation group during the operation and at 2 and 7 days after the operation were lower than those of the control group, the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).The degree of swelling and the restriction degree of mouth opening in the observation group were lighter than those in the control group at 2 days after operation, and the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).The total incidence rate of postoperative complications in the observation group was lower than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).Conclusion Compared with the traditional bone chisel crown method, ultrasonic bone knife combined with high speed turbine has the advantages of minimal invasion, efficiency and safety in removing difficult impacted wisdom teeth.

Key words： Ultrasonic bone knife High speed turbine Traditional bone chisel crown method Difficult impacted wisdom teeth Swelling degree of operation area Limited degree of mouth opening Safety

基金资助:广东省中山市医学科研项目（2018A020248）

作者简介: 陈刚（1986-），男，湖南衡阳人，本科，主治医师，从事口腔颌面外科方向的研究

引用本文:

陈刚; 蒋立辉; 吴萍; 刘聪慧; 蓝翔. 超声骨刀结合高速涡轮机与传统凿骨劈冠法拔除下颌困难阻生智齿的效果比较[J]. 中国当代医药, 2020, 27(15): 10-14.
CHEN Gang; JIANG Li-hui; WU Ping; LIU Cong-hui; LAN Xiang. Effect comparison between ultrasonic bone knife combined with high speed turbine and traditional bone chisel crown method in the extraction of difficult impacted wisdom teeth of jaw. 中国当代医药, 2020, 27(15): 10-14.

链接本文:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/CN/ 或 http://dangdaiyiyao.com/CN/Y2020/V27/I15/10

[4]	赵庆扬，乔春暖，谢伟珍，等.两种拔牙法拔除下颌水平阻生智齿的疗效评价[J].海南医学，2018，29（8）：1172-1173.
[5]	包胡日查，秦宜德，杨晓.高速涡轮钻去阻力拔除下颌阻生智齿的价值探究[J].全科口腔医学杂志（电子版），2019，6（28）：129-130.
[6]	黄永恒.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的效果观察[J].当代医学，2019，25（12）：78-80.
[7]	彭凤英，邵卓娜，田志江.凿骨劈冠法与超声骨刀法拔除下颌阻生智齿的临床效果与安全性比较[J].中国中西医结合耳鼻咽喉科杂志，2017，25（2）：137-138，142.
[1]	Tenglikar P，Munnangi A，Mangalgi A，et al.An assessment of factors influencing the difficulty in third molar surgery[J].Ann Maxillofac Surg，2017，7（1）：45-50.
[2]	Vassiliou LV，Lahiri S，Matthews SN.Non-syndromic bilateral dentigerous cysts with significant root resorption：a case report[J].Oral Surg，2015，8（1）：59-62.
[3]	Mistry FK，Hegde ND，Hegde MN.Postsurgical consequences in lower third molar surgical extraction using micromotor and piezosurgery[J].Ann Maxillofac Surg，2016，6（2）：251-259.
[8]	Ehsan A，Alibukhari SG，Ashar K，et al.Effects of preoperative submucosal dexamethasone injection on the postoperative swelling and trismus following surgical extraction of mandibular third molar[J].J Coll Physicians Surg Pak，2014，24（7）：489-492.
[9]	李树朝.涡轮手机与传统凿骨劈冠法应用于下颌阻生智齿拔除的临床探讨[J].北京口腔医学，2018，26（2）：102-104.
[10]	胡雷震.微创拔牙器械联合高速涡轮牙钻拔牙法治疗下颌低位阻生智齿患者的疗效及对其术后生活质量的影响[J].现代医用影像学，2018，27（5）：1588-1589.
[11]	张卓，卢华，张小冬，等.超声骨刀拔除下颌阻生智齿临床效果的Meta 分析[J].临床口腔医学杂志，2017，33（10）：616-620.
[12]	Bhati B，Kukreja P，Kumar S，et al.Piezosurgery versus rotatory osteotomy in mandibular impacted third molar extraction[J].Ann Maxillofac Surg，2017，7（1）：5-10.
[13]	屈胜利，张亚柯.高速涡轮钻微创去骨分牙法联合地塞米松局部注射在下颌阻生智齿患者中的应用研究[J].现代医药卫生，2018，34（13）：2046-2048.
[14]	王曦光，张占乐，段海南.超声骨刀法拔除下颌阻生智齿的临床观察[J].现代仪器与医疗，2018，24（1）：102-103.
[15]	赵晶.高速涡轮牙钻及微创拔牙刀在下颌阻生智齿拔除术中的应用[J].中国医疗器械信息，2018，24（23）：115-116.
[16]	葛然.下颌水平埋伏阻生智齿高速涡轮钻增隙的临床应用效果[J].中国医疗器械信息，2019，25（16）：79-80.
[17]	王鹏.浅析高速涡轮钻微创法及传统凿骨劈冠法用于低位埋伏下颌阻生智齿拔除治疗临床研究[J].中国保健营养，2018，28（35）：158.
[18]	周珉，陈俊兰.超声骨刀与高速涡轮钻联合拔除下颌阻生智齿的临床效果观察[J].甘肃医药，2019，38（6）：498-499.
[19]	吴丽琴，邱著文，郑德春.高速涡轮钻微创拔牙法对下颌阻生智齿患者术后VAS 评分及并发症发生率的影响[J].赣南医学院学报，2018，38（5）：447-449.
[20]	米尔阿迪力·阿不都卡地尔，古丽奴尔·沙吾提.高速涡轮牙钻在下颌阻生智齿拔除中的应用[J].全科口腔医学杂志（电子版），2019，6（7）：60，65.