Suppr超能文献

不可修复的经根管治疗牙齿的微创拔牙技术:一项对比研究。

Minimally traumatic extraction techniques in nonrestorable endodontically treated teeth: A comparative study.

作者信息

Sharma Sneha D, Gupta Ashish, Bansal Pankaj, Alexander Mohan, Vidya B, Gupta Himani

机构信息

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sudha Rustagi College of Dental Sciences and Research, Faridabad, Haryana, India.

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, MAHSA University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

出版信息

Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2022 Aug;13(Suppl 1):S91-S96. doi: 10.4103/njms.njms_309_21. Epub 2022 Aug 20.

Abstract

AIM

The goal of this study was to assess the effectiveness of piezotome as compared to periotome extractions of nonrestorable endodontic treatment of teeth in terms of operational time, pain control, and postoperative bone loss considering the prosthetic rehabilitation in future.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A double-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 100 patients who wanted single-rooted teeth to be extracted (which failed endodontically). The participants have been randomized into two equal groups named as - (i) a periotome group (ii) and a piezotome group. Duration of the surgery, postoperative pain within 7 days, complications (if any) associated with the extraction process were performed as a part of clinical assessment. Bone loss has been analyzed 6 months after the surgery radiographically. The data have been recorded and analyzed using the version 22.0 of the SPSS software package.

RESULTS

All parameters in the periotome category ( < 0.05) were statistically significant except for bone loss and gingival laceration in comparison to piezotome group. In the piezotome group, a longer time was observed for surgery and delayed pain control was achieved. In our study, we found statistically significant more marginal bone loss in piezotome group in comparison with periotome group.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study indicate that for intraoperative and postoperative comfort periotome could be used as a safer and cheaper option for atraumatic extractions but piezosurgery may prove as a better choice soon for surgeries in the maxillofacial region to maintain soft-tissue integrity.

摘要

目的

本研究的目的是比较超声骨刀与传统骨膜分离器在拔除不可修复的牙髓治疗牙齿时的有效性,评估指标包括手术时间、疼痛控制以及考虑到未来修复重建时的术后骨吸收情况。

材料与方法

对100例需要拔除单根牙(牙髓治疗失败)的患者进行了一项双盲随机对照试验。参与者被随机分为两组:(i)传统骨膜分离器组(ii)超声骨刀组。手术持续时间、术后7天内的疼痛情况、拔牙过程中出现的并发症(如有)作为临床评估的一部分进行记录。术后6个月通过影像学分析骨吸收情况。数据使用SPSS 22.0软件包进行记录和分析。

结果

与超声骨刀组相比,传统骨膜分离器组除骨吸收和牙龈撕裂外的所有参数(<0.05)均具有统计学意义。在超声骨刀组中,手术时间较长,疼痛控制延迟。在我们的研究中,发现超声骨刀组的边缘骨吸收比传统骨膜分离器组在统计学上更显著。

结论

本研究结果表明,对于术中及术后舒适度而言,传统骨膜分离器可作为无创拔牙更安全、更便宜的选择,但超声骨刀手术可能很快会被证明是上颌面部手术中保持软组织完整性的更好选择。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8907/9651255/798ceb2219fc/NJMS-13-91-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验