CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS, X-RAY AND ASSESSMENT OF THIRD MOLAR SURGERY WITH PIEZOTOME ULTRASOUND MACHINE AT CAN THO EYE AND ODONTO-MAXILLO-FACIAL HOSPITAL IN 2019-2020
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Third lower molar partially erupted is commonly, accounting for 42.7%. Using of Piezotome in surgery can yield good results, but it is still under debate. Objectives: To describe the clinical, radiological characteristics of patients with the third molar teeth lower, lower jaw and evaluate the effectiveness of the third molar and implant lower molar surgery using Piezotome ultrasound machine. Materials and methods: The study used the cross-sectional descriptive method, with no control intervention on 73 patients (36 women and 37 men, 15-71 years of age) with deviated lower wisdom teeth, who received surgical treatment with Piezotome at Can Tho Eye and Odonto-Maxillo-Facial Hospital from August, 2019 to August, 2020 by SPSS 18.0 software. Results: The percentage of subjects with postoperative swelling complications was 56.2% and 4.1% of jaw close. The rate of signs of pain was 98.6%; infection was 52.1%; jaw tightness was 11.0%; tooth decay 7 was 30.1%. The pederson's index of the difficult type was 57.5%; the new index for the difficult type was 34.2%; the time for the hard to spit was 39.7%. Conclusion: The subjects treating the under-erupted wisdom teeth all had clinical symptoms. In subclinical terms, 39.7% of subjects were in the difficult-to-extract group. The percentage of subjects with complications after surgery was low.
Keywords
Third molar teeth, Piezotome Machine, Third incisional molar complication
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
2. Phạm Cao Phong (2014), Những biến chứng hay gặp răng khôn hàm dưới mọc lệch ngầm, Tạp chí Y học thực hành, (914) – Số 4/2014, tr. 59-60.
3. Lê Hữu Toàn (2019), Đánh giá kết quả điều trị phẫu thuật răng khôn hàm dưới mọc lệch tại khoa răng hàm mặt bệnh viện Quân Y 7A, Tạp chí Y dược thực hành, (175) – Số 20, tr. 111-117.
4. Akashi M., Hiraoka Y, Hasegawa T, Komori T (2016), Temporal Evaluation of Neurosensory Complications After Mandibular Third Molar Extraction: Current Problems for Diagnosis and Treatment, The Open Dentistry Journal, Volume 10, pp. 728-732.
5. Bhati B. (2017), Piezosurgery versus Rotatory Osteotomy in Mandibular Impacted Third Molar Extraction, British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 50, pp.50-55.
6. Monoj Goyal, Karan Marya, (2012). Comparative evaluation of surgical outcome after removal of impacted mandibular third molars using a Piezotome or a conventional handpiece: a prospective study. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 50, pp. 556-561.
7. Moraschini V., R. Hidalgo, E. dS.Porto Barboza (2016), Effect of submucosal injection of dexamethasone after third molar surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 45, pp. 232–240.
8. Roy I., Baliga SD, Louis A, Rao S (2015), Importance of Clinical and Radiological Parameters in Assessment of Surgical Difficulty in Removal of Impacted Mandibular 3rd Molars: A New Index, British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 14(3), pp. 745-749.
9. Sammartino G., R. Gasparro, (2017), Extraction of mandibular third molars: proposal of a new scale of difficulty, British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 55, pp. 952–957.
10. Srivastava P., P Shetty, S Shetty (2019), Comparision of Surgical Outcom after impacted Third Molar Surgery Using Piezotome and a Convetional Rotary Handpiece, Original Article, January 13, pp. 318-324.