Abstract:

Objective To observe and compare the outcomes of impacted mandibular third molar extraction with different tooth separation techniques. Methods One hundred and fifty low and medial impacted mandibular third molars in 150 patients were selected, and were extracted with traditional hammer and chisel technique (n=50), hammer and chisel+“T” typed tooth separation technique (n=50) and turbine+“T” typed tooth separation technique (n=50), respectively. The incidences of postoperative reactions (regional swelling and pain) and complications were compared among groups. Results The incidence of severe postoperative regional swelling in patients treated with turbine+“T” typed tooth separation technique was significantly lower than that in those treated with traditional hammer and chisel technique (16% vs 34%, P<0.05). The incidences of postoperative Ⅲ degree pain in patients with traditional hammer and chisel technique, hammer and chisel+“T” typed tooth separation technique and turbine+“T” typed tooth separation technique were 36%, 20% and 4%, respectively, and there were significant differences among patients treated with different techniques （P<0.05）. The incidences of postoperative complications such as numbness of lower lip, extraction of lorum together with dental root and fever in patients treated with hammer and chisel+“T” typed tooth separation technique and turbine+“T” typed tooth separation technique were significantly lower than those in patients treated with traditional hammer and chisel technique (P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with traditional hammer and chisel technique, turbine+“T” typed tooth separation technique works better in extraction of impacted mandibular third molars with less postoperative reactions and complications.

Key words: “T&rdquo, typed tooth separation technique, traditional hammer and chisel technique, impacted tooth, mandibular third molar