Traditional vs. orthodontic extraction of impacted teeth related to the inferior alveolar nerve: a randomized control trial

下牙槽神经阻生牙传统拔除术与正畸拔除术的比较:一项随机对照试验

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective randomized controlled trial was to compare the effects of orthodontic and traditional extraction methods on nerve injury following the extraction of impacted third molars close to the inferior alveolar nerve and to demonstrate the impact of factors such as gender, age, systemic diseases, the side of the third molar, its position, and classification on nerve recovery. METHODS: Patients with impacted third molars close to the inferior alveolar nerve and an indication for impacted third molar extraction were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical approach to be applied. RESULTS: Preoperative 2-point discrimination (2PD) test values, as well as postoperative 2PD test and visual analog scales (VAS) values on the 7th day, 14th day, and 1st, 3rd, and 6th months, were compared. In the traditional extraction group, the results of the 2PD test were statistically significantly higher on the 7th day, 14th day, 1 month, and 3 months compared to the orthodontic extraction group (P < 0.05). Sex, age, systemic disease, M3 side, position, and classification had no statistically significant effect on nerve recovery (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The orthodontic extraction was found to be safer than traditional extraction in terms of nerve injury for high-risk M3s. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on www. CLINICALTRIALS: govin13/02/2024 . CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT06270784.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。