摘要
目的:对2种拔除下颌骨埋伏阻生智牙方法的临床效果进行比较。方法:选取双侧阻生情况相似的下颌骨埋伏阻生智牙拔除患者15例,左右两侧手术相隔2周,分别采用侧入法(经下颌骨外斜线途径)和常规的上入法(经牙槽嵴顶途径)拔除两侧智牙,记录手术时间、术后反应及并发症情况,采用配对t检验进行统计学分析。结果:侧入法组手术时间(66.73±19.26)min,明显短于上入法组的(91.20±39.19)min,两者有显著性差异(P=0.0026);肿胀情况:侧入法组较上入法组明显(P=0.0233);术后疼痛及张口度情况两组之间差别不大。上入法拔除组术后有4例伤口延期愈合,4例发生一过性下唇麻木;侧入法组伤口均一期愈合,有2例发生一过性下唇麻木。结论:使用侧入法拔除下颌骨内埋伏阻生智牙特别适用于埋伏牙位置深、对保持术区牙槽嵴高度要求高的病例。
PURPOSE: To explore 2 procedures of removing intrabony impacted mandibular third molars. METHODS: A cross-over study design was used; the sample consisted of fifteen patients who underwent removal of bilateral intrabony impacted mandibular third molars with the same condition of impaction. A new procedure with buccal approach was used randomly in one side in comparison with the traditional procedure with alveolar approach used in the contralateral side. The surgical time, postoperative reaction and complications were recorded and compared with paired t test. RESULTS: The surgical time of the buccal approach was (66.73±19.26) min,shorter than that of the alveolar approach of (91.20±39.19) min statistically(P=0.0026), while the facial swelling experienced by the alveolar approach was significantly less than that experienced by the buccal approach(P=0.0233). No statistically significant differences were found in comparing measurements of the degree of pain and trismus. There were four cases suffering from delayed wound healing and four cases experienced labial sensory disturbance temporarily by the alveolar approach, and no cases had delayed wound healing and two cases labial sensory disturbance temporarily by the buccal approach. CONCLUSION: The buccal approach is indicated for cases with deeply intrabony impacted mandibular third molars and requirement for retaining the height of the alveolar ridge.
出处
《中国口腔颌面外科杂志》
CAS
2004年第2期80-83,共4页
China Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
