Literature DB >> 25201232

Four osteotomy methods with piezosurgery to remove complicated mandibular third molars: a retrospective study.

Jing Ge1, Chi Yang2, Jia-Wei Zheng3, Dong-Mei He3, Ling-Yan Zheng4, Ying-Kai Hu5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Piezosurgery has been used widely in oral and maxillofacial surgery, but there has been no report systematically describing an osteotomy method with piezosurgery for complicated mandibular third molar removal. The aim of this study was to introduce 4 osteotomy methods using piezosurgery and evaluate their effects.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of patients with a complicated impacted mandibular third molar requiring extraction. The predictor variable was the extraction technique. Four osteotomy methods using piezosurgery were tested according to different impaction types: method 1 involved complete bone removal; method 2 involved segmental bone removal; method 3 involved bone removal combined with tooth splitting; and method 4 involved block bone removal. Outcome variables were success rate, operative time, major complications (including nerve injury, mandible fracture, severe hematoma, or severe edema), and serious pyogenic infection. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.
RESULTS: The study was composed of 55 patients with 74 complicated impacted mandibular third molars. All impacted mandibular third molars were removed successfully. The average surgical time was 15 minutes (range, 8 to 26 minutes). Thirty-eight molars (51.4%) were extracted by method 1, 18 molars (24.3%) by method 2, 12 molars (16.2%) by method 3, and 6 molars (8.1%) by method 4. Two cases (2.7%) developed postoperative infections and recovered within 1 week using drainage and antibiotic administration.
CONCLUSION: The 4 osteotomy methods with piezosurgery provide effective ways of removing complicated impacted mandibular third molars.
Copyright © 2014 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25201232     DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2014.05.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0278-2391            Impact factor:   1.895


  6 in total

1.  Variations in the buccal-lingual alveolar bone thickness of impacted mandibular third molar: our classification and treatment perspectives.

Authors:  Jing Ge; Jia-Wei Zheng; Chi Yang; Wen-Tao Qian
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-01-13       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  Adjacent tooth trauma in complicated mandibular third molar surgery: Risk degree classification and digital surgical simulation.

Authors:  Zhou-Xi Ye; Chi Yang; Jing Ge
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Mesiolingual root rotation for horizontal mandibular third molar extraction: position classification and surgical simulation.

Authors:  Zhou-Xi Ye; Chi Yang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Thickness of Buccal and Lingual Alveolar Bone Plates according to the Position of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars on Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Scans.

Authors:  Seyed Alireza Parhiz; Pegah Bakhtiary; Farzaneh Mosavat; Mohammad Javad Kharazifard
Journal:  Front Dent       Date:  2019-08-30

5.  A Pilot Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Piezo Versus Conventional Rotary Surgery for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars.

Authors:  Joana Saraiva Amaral; Carlos Miguel Marto; João Farias; Daniela Alves Pereira; Jorge Ermida; Álvaro Banaco; António Campos Felino; Francisco Caramelo; Sérgio Matos
Journal:  Bioengineering (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-25

6.  A Review on the Application of Silver Nanoparticles in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

Authors:  Diane Isabel Selvido; Bishwa Prakash Bhattarai; Apiwat Riddhabhaya; Kadkao Vongsawan; Siripen Arunpraphan; Natthamet Wongsirichat
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2021-08-24
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.