Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2010
[Comparison of two kinds of procedures used in the removal of horizontal impacted mandibular third molars].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Wen-Chao, Ruan Ning
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique in the removal of horizontal impacted mandibular third molars.
METHODS: 150 horizontal impacted mandibular third molars were randomly divided into two groups, 75 teeth in each group. One group received lingual split bone technique, while the other group received high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique. Both the operation time and operation complication were compared.
RESULTS: The operating time with lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique were (35.85 +/- 6.05) min and (43.52 +/- 7.70) min (P < 0.05), respectively. There was significant difference of intraoperative fracture lingual film removal and facial swelling between lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique (P < 0.05). While there was no significant difference of gingival laceration, postoperative pain, restriction of mouth opening and postoperative bleed between lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique (P > 0.05). There was no lingual nerve injury or numbness of lower lip occurred in two kinds of procedures. Dry socket occurred in a case of high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique.
CONCLUSION: Lingual split bone technique is better in the removal of horizontal impacted mandibular third molars. It could shorten operation time and reduce the intraoperative and postoperative complications.
METHODS: 150 horizontal impacted mandibular third molars were randomly divided into two groups, 75 teeth in each group. One group received lingual split bone technique, while the other group received high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique. Both the operation time and operation complication were compared.
RESULTS: The operating time with lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique were (35.85 +/- 6.05) min and (43.52 +/- 7.70) min (P < 0.05), respectively. There was significant difference of intraoperative fracture lingual film removal and facial swelling between lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique (P < 0.05). While there was no significant difference of gingival laceration, postoperative pain, restriction of mouth opening and postoperative bleed between lingual split bone technique and high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique (P > 0.05). There was no lingual nerve injury or numbness of lower lip occurred in two kinds of procedures. Dry socket occurred in a case of high speed turbine bodkin boneless technique.
CONCLUSION: Lingual split bone technique is better in the removal of horizontal impacted mandibular third molars. It could shorten operation time and reduce the intraoperative and postoperative complications.