• Medicine · Aug 2022

    Effect on implant drills and postoperative reactions for pre-extraction interradicular implant bed preparation during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

    • Tian-Ge Deng, Ping Liu, Hong-Zhi Zhou, Yang Xue, Xue-Ni Zheng, Zhao-Hua Ji, Lei Wang, Kai-Jin Hu, and Yu-Xiang Ding.
    • State Key Laboratory of Military Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & Shaanxi Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Department of Oral Surgery, School of Stomatology, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
    • Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Aug 19; 101 (33): e29249e29249.

    AbstractThe aim of the present study was to observe the abrasion of implant drills and postoperative reactions for the preparation of the interradicular immediate implant bed during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Thirty-two implant drills were included in four groups: blank, improved surgery, traditional surgery, and control. In the improved surgery group, a dental handpiece with a surgical bur was used to decoronate the first molar and create a hole in the middle of the retained root complex, followed by the pilot drilling protocol through the hole. The remaining root complex was separated using a surgical bur and then extracted. Subsequently, the implant bed was prepared. Implant drills were used in the traditional surgery group to complete the decoronation, hole creation, and implant-drilling processes. The tooth remained intact until the implant bed was prepared. The surface roughness of the pilot drill was observed and measured. Surgery time, postoperative reactions (swelling, pain, and trismus), and fear of coronavirus disease 2019 scale (FCV-19S) were measured and recorded, respectively. Statistical analysis revealed significant difference with surface roughness among blank group (0.41 ± 0.05 μm), improved surgery group (0.37 ± 0.06 μm), traditional surgery group (0.16 ± 0.06 μm), and control group (0.26 ± 0.04 μm) (P < .001). Significant differences were revealed with surgery time between improved surgery group (5.63 ± 1.77 min) and traditional surgery group (33.63 ± 2.13 min) (P < .001). Swelling, pain, and trismus (improved group: r ≥ 0.864, P ≤ .006; traditional group: r ≥ 0.741, P ≤ .035) were positively correlated with the FCV-19S. This study proved that a new pilot drill could only be used once in traditional surgery but could be used regularly in improved surgery. Improved surgery was more effective, efficient, and economical than the traditional surgery. The higher FCV-19S, the more severe swelling, pain, and trismus.Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.