• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利：CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法，用中文像聊天一样搜索，搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐，让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版，准确专业，支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式，支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述，25分钟生成高质量综述，智能提取关键信息，辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

舌侧劈开技术与颊侧沟技术在下颌舌侧阻生第三磨牙拔除中的应用评估：一项对比研究。

Evaluation of lingual split technique vs. Buccal guttering in extraction of lingually placed impacted mandibular third molar: A comparative study.

作者信息

Kharmawlong Reading Well, Singh Geeta, Mohammad Shadab, Ram Hari, Singh Vibha, Agrawal Amiya

机构信息

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, King George's Medical University Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

出版信息

Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2025 May-Aug;16(2):338-346. doi: 10.4103/njms.njms_61_23. Epub 2025 Aug 30.

DOI:10.4103/njms.njms_61_23
PMID:41019682
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12469170/
Abstract

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate lingual split technique vs buccal guttering in the extraction of lingually placed impacted mandibular third molar and to assess the clinical outcome of the two techniques in relation to pain, swelling, mouth opening, intra-operative time, dry socket, paraesthesia due to injury to the lingual and inferior alveolar nerve and hemorrhage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present clinical study comprised of 36 lingually impacted mandibular third molars. Patients were divided into two groups, and bone covering the third molar was removed by the lingual split technique using chisel and mallet and buccal guttering approach technique using rotary instruments.

RESULTS

The conventional buccal guttering technique took longer time with higher incidence of dry socket than the lingual split technique. Significant findings were also recorded in the lingual split technique in terms of pain, swelling, and trismus. Postoperative nerve injury was significantly higher in lingual split technique.

CONCLUSION

The study concluded that lingual split technique using chisel and mallet is found to be better than the buccal guttering approach technique using rotary instruments.

摘要

目的

评估舌侧劈开技术与颊侧沟法在下颌第三磨牙舌侧阻生拔除术中的应用，并评估这两种技术在疼痛、肿胀、张口度、手术时间、干槽症、舌神经及下牙槽神经损伤导致的感觉异常和出血方面的临床结果。

材料与方法

本临床研究纳入36颗下颌第三磨牙舌侧阻生病例。患者分为两组，分别采用凿子和锤子进行舌侧劈开技术去除覆盖第三磨牙的骨质，以及使用旋转器械的颊侧沟法技术。

结果

传统颊侧沟法技术耗时更长，干槽症发生率高于舌侧劈开技术。舌侧劈开技术在疼痛、肿胀和牙关紧闭方面也有显著结果。舌侧劈开技术术后神经损伤明显更高。

结论

研究得出结论，使用凿子和锤子的舌侧劈开技术优于使用旋转器械的颊侧沟法技术。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/ee772b82d6eb/NJMS-16-338-g013.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/bb1ba2a4efb7/NJMS-16-338-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/9841c2fb46ac/NJMS-16-338-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/e47e590ac7d1/NJMS-16-338-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/d4dc57a9333d/NJMS-16-338-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/6d8bb93007e9/NJMS-16-338-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/3b9484829809/NJMS-16-338-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/74fe346ca024/NJMS-16-338-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/67271a0080a0/NJMS-16-338-g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/6a5cc365d33c/NJMS-16-338-g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/44afb3d36457/NJMS-16-338-g010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/145948f77b0e/NJMS-16-338-g011.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/5a473573962c/NJMS-16-338-g012.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/ee772b82d6eb/NJMS-16-338-g013.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/bb1ba2a4efb7/NJMS-16-338-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/9841c2fb46ac/NJMS-16-338-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/e47e590ac7d1/NJMS-16-338-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/d4dc57a9333d/NJMS-16-338-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/6d8bb93007e9/NJMS-16-338-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/3b9484829809/NJMS-16-338-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/74fe346ca024/NJMS-16-338-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/67271a0080a0/NJMS-16-338-g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/6a5cc365d33c/NJMS-16-338-g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/44afb3d36457/NJMS-16-338-g010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/145948f77b0e/NJMS-16-338-g011.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/5a473573962c/NJMS-16-338-g012.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a674/12469170/ee772b82d6eb/NJMS-16-338-g013.jpg

相似文献

1
Evaluation of lingual split technique vs. Buccal guttering in extraction of lingually placed impacted mandibular third molar: A comparative study.舌侧劈开技术与颊侧沟技术在下颌舌侧阻生第三磨牙拔除中的应用评估：一项对比研究。
Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2025 May-Aug;16(2):338-346. doi: 10.4103/njms.njms_61_23. Epub 2025 Aug 30.
2
Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.下颌智齿拔除的手术技术。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jul 29(7):CD004345. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004345.pub2.
3
Comparison of two surgical techniques for the extraction of mandibular horizontally impacted third molars near the mandibular canal: the displacement reduction method and the away-from-nerve method.两种用于拔除下颌管附近下颌水平阻生第三磨牙的手术技术比较：移位复位法和远离神经法。
Clin Oral Investig. 2025 May 7;29(6):287. doi: 10.1007/s00784-025-06366-6.
4
Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket).牙槽骨炎（干槽症）管理的局部干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12:CD006968. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006968.pub2.
5
Efficacy of Dexamethasone Injection at Different Sites on Postoperative Sequelae After Extracting Mandibular Impacted Third Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial.不同部位注射地塞米松对下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除术后后遗症的疗效：一项随机对照试验。
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024 Sep;82(9):1129-1138. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2024.04.020. Epub 2024 May 7.
6
Lingual split versus surgical bur technique in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars: a systematic review.舌侧劈开术与外科涡轮钻技术在下颌第三磨牙阻生牙拔除术中的应用：系统评价。
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012 Sep;114(3):294-302. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.07.028. Epub 2012 Jan 27.
7
Determination of anatomical position of inferior alveolar nerve canal in relation to buccal cortical bone in patients with different mandibular skeletal relationships.不同下颌骨骨骼关系患者下牙槽神经管相对于颊侧皮质骨的解剖位置测定。
Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2025 May-Aug;16(2):328-337. doi: 10.4103/njms.njms_7_24. Epub 2025 Aug 30.
8
Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket).局部干预治疗牙槽突炎（干槽症）。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Sep 26;9(9):CD006968. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006968.pub3.
9
Evaluation of postoperative trismus in buccal versus lingual approach for impacted mandibular third molar removal.颊侧与舌侧入路在下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除术后牙关紧闭情况的评估
Bioinformation. 2025 May 31;21(5):1113-1117. doi: 10.6026/973206300211113. eCollection 2025.
10
Lingual flap retraction and prevention of lingual nerve damage associated with third molar surgery: a systematic review of the literature.舌瓣退缩与第三磨牙手术相关舌神经损伤的预防：文献系统评价
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2001 Apr;91(4):395-401. doi: 10.1067/moe.2001.114154.

本文引用的文献

1
The Pattern of Mandibular Third Molar Impaction and Assessment of Surgery Difficulty: A Retrospective Study of Radiographs in East Baltic Population.下颌第三磨牙阻生模式及手术难度评估：波罗的海东部人群的 X 光片回顾性研究。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jun 3;18(11):6016. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18116016.
2
Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.下颌智齿拔除的手术技术。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jul 29(7):CD004345. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004345.pub2.
3
Lingual split versus surgical bur technique in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars: a systematic review.
舌侧劈开术与外科涡轮钻技术在下颌第三磨牙阻生牙拔除术中的应用：系统评价。
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012 Sep;114(3):294-302. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.07.028. Epub 2012 Jan 27.
4
Simplified split-bone technique for removal of impacted mandibular third molars.用于拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙的简化分牙技术
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995 Oct;24(5):348-50. doi: 10.1016/s0901-5027(05)80489-8.
5
Stereophotogrammetric and clinical evaluation of morbidity after removal of lower third molars by two different surgical techniques.两种不同手术技术拔除下颌第三磨牙后发病率的立体摄影测量与临床评估
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996 Feb;54(2):171-5. doi: 10.1016/s0278-2391(96)90441-3.
6
A comparison of morbidity following the removal of lower third molars by the lingual split and surgical bur methods.舌侧劈开法与外科牙钻法拔除下颌第三磨牙后发病率的比较。
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1993 Jun;22(3):149-53. doi: 10.1016/s0901-5027(05)80240-1.
7
Reevaluation of the lingual split-bone technique for removal of impacted mandibular third molars.
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1984 Feb;42(2):114-7. doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(84)90323-9.
8
Modified distolingual splitting technique for removal of impacted mandibular third molars: technique.
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1983 Jul;56(1):2-8. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(83)90046-4.
9
Postoperative morbidity with mandibular third molar surgery: a comparison of two techniques.下颌第三磨牙手术的术后发病率：两种技术的比较。
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988 Jun;46(6):474-6. doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(88)90415-6.
10
Indications and contraindications for removal of the impacted tooth.
Dent Clin North Am. 1979 Jul;23(3):333-46.