Flap design and mandibular third molar surgery: a split mouth randomized clinical study

Effect of a Thermosensitive Hydroxybutyl Chitosan Hydrogel on Postoperative Sequalae and Quality of Life After Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Extraction

BACKGROUND

Third molar (M3) extraction is a common surgery in oral and maxillofacial surgery, and composite wound dressings such as hydroxybutyl chitosan (HBC) may improve postoperative sequala following M3 removal.

PURPOSE

The study purpose was to measure and compare differences in pain, swelling, trismus, wound healing, and quality of life (QOL) between the HBC and the control sides in patients undergoing M3 removal.

STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE

This study is a double-blind, split-mouth, randomized clinical trial. Patients who required M3 removal between June 2022 and May 2023 were included. Exclusion criteria included seafood allergies, smoking, poor oral hygiene, and systemic diseases.

PREDICTOR VARIABLE

The predictor variable was the socket treatment technique. Subjects were randomly assigned to the HBC or control (physiological saline) side.

MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE

The primary outcome variables, including pain assessed by visual analog scale, swelling, and maximal incisional opening, were measured on the first, third, and seventh postoperative days. The secondary outcome variables included QOL and wound healing score measured on the third and seventh days after surgery.

COVARIATES

The covariates included age, sex, and operation time.

ANALYSES

The Shapiro‒Wilk test was used to evaluate the normality of the data distribution. The paired t test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test was adopted. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.

RESULTS

The study included 60 patients (mean age: 25.81 ± 4.91; 23 (38%) males, 37 (62%) females). A statistically significant difference in the level of pain (HBC: 37.58 ± 4.39 mm, control: 47.00 ± 4.33 mm, day 1, P < .001; 21.88 ± 3.25 mm, 35.95 ± 1.57 mm, day 3, P < .001), maximal incisional opening (23.92 ± 1.38 mm, 18.22 ± 1.82 mm, day 1, P < .001; 30.00 ± 1.61 mm, 23.78 ± 1.70 mm, day 3, P < .001), and swelling (6.86 ± 0.70 mm, 7.15 ± 0.80 mm, day 3, P = .006) was detected after surgery. A statistically significant difference in QOL was detected (HBC: 13.70 ± 1.65, control: 18.60 ± 2.14, day 3, P < .001).

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

The application of HBC hydrogels to wounds after impacted mandibular M3 extraction reduces postoperative sequalae, promotes wound healing and improves postoperative QOL.

The effect of primary closure versus secondary closure techniques on postoperative wound pain in patients undergoing mandibular surgery: A meta-analysis

This research is intended to explore the influence of second and first degree closure methods on the degree of wound pain and swelling of the face following the removal of the mandible. For the purpose of this study, three data sets, including PubMed and Embase, were selected. A separate statistical analysis was conducted on the choice of the trial, the collection of data and the risk of bias. Differences between trials were analysed with a chi-square approach, with data analyses dependent on I2. A sensitivity analysis was conducted, and a possible publication bias was evaluated. Ultimately, nine qualifying trials were chosen out of an original pool of 1922 related trials following an in-depth evaluation under the eligibility and exclusion criteria, as well as a follow-up screening. The results indicated that there was no statistically significant change in the degree of post-operation pain after 1 day operation between one or secondary closures of treatment (MD, -0.46; 95% CI, -0.93, 0.01, p = 0.06); the results showed that there were no statistically significant differences in post-operation wound pain after 3 days in two group (MD, -0.15; 95% CI, -0.68, 0.37, p = 0.56); the results showed that there were no statistically different effects on the post-operation wound pain after the 7th day in two groups (MD, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.31, 0.03, p = 0.1). The results showed that there were no statistically different effects on the post-operation wound pain after the 1 day in two groups (MD, -0.26; 95% CI, -0.38, -0.13, p < 0.0001); on the 3rd day after surgery, the face was significantly smaller swelling in the secondary closure of closure compared with the first-stage closure group (MD, -0.70; 95% CI, -1.40, -0.00, p = 0.05). While there is no obvious effect on post-operation wound pain in patients with mandibular surgery, there is significant difference in post-operation face swelling. The findings do not support a preference for any of these methods.

Six-Month Soft Tissues Healing after Lower Third Molar Extraction: Comparison of Two Different Access Flaps

BACKGROUND

As specific flap designs performed for lower third molar extractions usually influence periodontal healing of the adjacent first and second molars, this study aimed to evaluate the periodontal conditions of these sites after 6 months post-surgery.

METHODS

Forty patients, aged 14-30 years, were included. Surgical extraction of the lower third molar was performed through a flap with papilla detachment (a modified envelope technique with detachment of gingival papilla between the first and second molars) or a trapezoidal flap (characterized by mesial- and distal-releasing incisions). Periodontal parameters at the first and second molar sites were assessed for visible plaque index, bleeding on probing, recession, probing pocket depth, and clinical attachment loss before surgery (T0), one month (T1), and six months after extraction (T2).

RESULTS

No statistical differences were found for the plaque and bleeding indexes between the two flaps at each observation time and considering both time intervals. For recession, no statistical differences were found between the two flaps considering the final time interval. For probing pocket depth at the second molar site, both techniques registered a significant increase between T0 and T1, followed by a decrease up to T2. For clinical attachment loss, mean values assessed for the first and second molar sites demonstrated evidently increased values between T0 and T1, followed by moderate decreases up to T2.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering short (T1) and mid-term (T2) follow-ups, a specific flap design does not seem to particularly influence periodontal healing six months after surgery.

Influence of Surgical Technique on Post-Operative Complications in the Extraction of the Lower Third Molar: A Retrospective Study

The surgical extraction of the impacted third molar is frequently associated with several complications. The purpose of this study is to assess how two different surgical protocols affect post-operative complications during the extraction of the lower impacted third molars. In order to compare and evaluate two different techniques (triangular flap vs. envelope flap), and the relative post-extraction complications, two groups of 150 patients each underwent to surgical impacted third molar extraction and 60 days of follow-up. The complication rate in the two groups was 14.00% in group A and 17.33% in group B. There was a strong association between smoking (OR: 2.8) and the use of oral contraceptives (OR: 1.75) with complications. The age- and sex-related incidence of complications in hard tissue healing has great variability in the literature; the analysis performed on our data did not show a statistically significant association between them. Even though related to a higher incidence of transient changes in sensitivity, it was found that the envelope flap saw a lower percentage of complications. There is still no clarity on which is the best protocol for the extraction of the lower impacted third molar, and the choice often depends on the surgeon's experience.

Efficacy of Dexamethasone Diluted Saline Irrigant on Postoperative Sequelae in Patients Undergoing Lower Third Molar Surgery: A Prospective Clinical Study

Background Third molar impaction surgery is one of the most common yet challenging procedures done as a part of minor oral surgery. Years of research and improvisation of techniques have been done, yet there are still a lot of postoperative sequelae after surgical removal of the impacted tooth. In our study, we have compared the efficacy of dexamethasone diluted saline solution over plain saline solution used as an irrigant in the reduction of postoperative sequelae for lower third molar surgery. Aim The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone diluted saline solution over plain saline solution in the reduction of postoperative sequelae for lower third molar surgery. Materials and methods The research was conducted at Saveetha Dental College and Hospital in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. The study consisted of 48 individuals, 24 of whom had dexamethasone saline as an irrigant (8 mg of dexamethasone was diluted in 100 ml of plain saline) (Group 1), and 24 in whom plain saline was used as an irrigant (Group 2) in the lower third molar surgery. Patients were evaluated postoperatively for pain and swelling. The postoperative swelling was measured on postoperative day two and day seven. Postoperative pain was measured on day two, day four, and day seven after surgery using a visual analog scale. Data were analyzed using SPSS (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) with P-values less than 0.05 considered statistically significant. The statistical test used to compare the outcomes between the two groups was the independent samples t-test. Results It was found that study participants in the dexamethasone saline irrigation group reported statistically significantly lesser pain than participants receiving plain saline irrigation on day two (P = 0.001), day four (P = 0.001), and day seven (P = 0.001), respectively. Also, there was a reduction in swelling among participants in the dexamethasone saline irrigation group when compared to the normal saline irrigation group, which was statistically significant (P = 0.001) on day two, while the postoperative swelling was not statistically significant on day seven (P = 0.08) between the two study groups. Conclusion Based on the results obtained, it can be concluded that dexamethasone saline solution (8 mg/100 mL) was more effective as an irrigant in reducing the postoperative sequelae than regular saline solution in the lower third molar surgery.

Three-dimensional facial swelling evaluation of piezo-electric vs conventional drilling bur surgery of impacted lower third molar: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Among the post-surgical complications of lower wisdom teeth surgery, swelling is considered by patients one of the most impairing, with both social and biological influences and impacting patients' quality of life. Aim of the study was to evaluate the swelling following the osteotomy when performed with drilling burs versus piezo-electric instruments in the mandibular impacted third molar extraction, using a facial reconstruction software.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A randomized, split-mouth, single-blind study was conducted on patients, ranging between 18 and 40 years of age, requiring lower third molars extraction and referred at the Oral Surgery Unit of the School of Dentistry of the University of Messina. Twenty-two patients were recruited during an 8 months period according to the following criteria: good general health conditions; bilateral, symmetrical, impacted third molars; no use of medication that would influence or alter wound healing; no temporomandibular joint disorder history; no smoking. All patients underwent bilateral surgical removal. For each patient, a facial scan was obtained prior to the surgical procedures. The two extractions were conducted performing, in a randomized way, osteotomy with rotatory burs or use of piezo surgical instruments. Facial scans were repeated at 3 and 7 days after the surgical procedures. Volumetric differences were calculated via superimposition using a dedicated software. The data obtained were processed using paired t-test.

RESULTS

The results obtained from our study showed no significant differences between two groups regarding post-operative swelling. To the best of our knowledge, this study represents the first experience of using an objective method that can be reproducible on the collection of patients' clinical parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3D digital analysis, in the evaluation of facial swelling, is a technique of simple application, objective, reproducible, reliable, decreasing the variables of error. Based on these data, it is possible to conclude that piezo surgery is a safe way for performing the osteotomies during third molar surgery. However, regarding the post-operative swelling, it does not show an advantage over classical rotary instruments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT05488028, on 04/08/2022). Approved by Ethical Committee of Messina: (ID 01-2020, on 27/04/2020).

Conventional Rotary Technique and Piezosurgical Technique in the Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar: A Comparative Study

AIM

To compare the operating time, postoperative pain, edema, trismus, and patient acceptance following surgical removal of impacted third molar using piezosurgery and conventional rotary technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

About 42 patients with impacted mesioangular mandibular third molars were included in this study. Subjects are divided into two groups: group I (treated with conventional rotary technique) and group II (treated with piezosurgery). Duration of surgery, pain, trismus, and swelling were assessed. The patients were evaluated on the 1st, 3rd, and 7th postoperative days.

RESULTS

Postoperative pain, trismus, and edema were reduced with piezosurgery compared with conventional technique. Even though the duration of time was longer with piezosurgery, patient comfort was found to be better.

CONCLUSION

Piezosurgery is a meticulous and innovative ultrasonic technique with selective bone cutting and better postoperative outcomes. However, it is expensive, and the operating time is prolonged.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Piezosurgery is an alternative in the surgical removal of third molars as it ensures precise and selective cutting, with no injury to the surrounding soft tissues. Postoperative outcome and patient acceptance are improved with piezosurgery.

Does surgical removal of mandibular third molar influence the periodontal status of the adjacent second molars? A systematic review

Objective: This study aimed to assess the influence of mandibular third molar surgical removal on the periodontal status of adjacent second molars and to investigate the potential impact of the flap design. Methods: A systematic review of the literature, registered in PROSPERO, has been carried out from Pubmed and Scopus databases following PRISMA guidelines from January 2010 to January 2022. PICO method was used to select the relevant articles. Studies comparing the periodontal status of the second molar before and after mandibular third molar removal were considered. Results: Twenty-three studies involving 1067 patients were included. The two main parameters studied were periodontal pocket depth and clinical attachment level. The envelope flap and the triangular flap were the most commonly used flap techniques. Periodontal health of adjacent second molar was maintained or improved in most of the included studies. The flap design did not seem to have a significant influence either. Conclusion: Avulsion of impacted third molar in healthy young adults does not impair the periodontal health of adjacent second molars. Further studies, with higher levels of evidence, are needed to confirm these results and to identify possible risk factors (such as age, impaction depth or periodontal disease) responsible for poorer healing.

Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket)

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a complication of dental extractions more often involving mandibular molar teeth. It is associated with severe pain developing 2 to 3 days postoperatively with or without halitosis, a socket that may be partially or totally devoid of a blood clot, and increased postoperative visits. This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2012.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of local interventions used for the prevention and treatment of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) following tooth extraction.

SEARCH METHODS

An Information Specialist searched four bibliographic databases up to 28 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of adults over 18 years of age who were having permanent teeth extracted or who had developed dry socket postextraction. We included studies with any type of local intervention used for the prevention or treatment of dry socket, compared to a different local intervention, placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies reporting on systemic use of antibiotics or the use of surgical techniques because these interventions are evaluated in separate Cochrane Reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We followed Cochrane statistical guidelines and reported dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For some of the split-mouth studies with sparse data, it was not possible to calculate RR so we calculated the exact odds ratio (OR) instead. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 trials with 6771 participants; 39 trials (with 6219 participants) investigated prevention of dry socket and 10 studies (with 552 participants) looked at the treatment of dry socket. 16 studies were at high risk of bias, 30 studies at unclear risk of bias, and 3 studies at low risk of bias. Chlorhexidine in the prevention of dry socket When compared to placebo, rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinses (0.12% and 0.2% concentrations) both before and 24 hours after extraction(s) substantially reduced the risk of developing dry socket with an OR of 0.38 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.58; P < 0.00001; 6 trials, 1547 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The prevalence of dry socket varies from 1% to 5% in routine dental extractions to upwards of 30% in surgically extracted third molars. The number of patients needed to be treated (NNT) with chlorhexidine rinse to prevent one patient having dry socket was 162 (95% CI 155 to 240), 33 (95% CI 27 to 49), and 7 (95% CI 5 to 10) for control prevalence of dry socket 0.01, 0.05, and 0.30 respectively.  Compared to placebo, placing chlorhexidine gel intrasocket after extractions reduced the odds of developing a dry socket by 58% with an OR of 0.44 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.71; P = 0.0008; 7 trials, 753 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The NNT with chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) to prevent one patient developing dry socket was 180 (95% CI 137 to 347), 37 (95% CI 28 to 72), and 7 (95% CI 5 to 15) for control prevalence of dry socket of 0.01, 0.05, and 0.30 respectively. Compared to chlorhexidine rinse (0.12%), placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) intrasocket after extractions was not superior in reducing the risk of dry socket (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.20; P = 0.22; 2 trials, 383 participants; low-certainty evidence).  The present review found some evidence for the association of minor adverse reactions with use of 0.12%, 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthrinses (alteration in taste, staining of teeth, stomatitis) though most studies were not designed explicitly to detect the presence of hypersensitivity reactions to mouthwash as part of the study protocol. No adverse events were reported in relation to the use of 0.2% chlorhexidine gel placed directly into a socket. Platelet rich plasma in the prevention of dry socket  Compared to placebo, placing platelet rich plasma after extractions was not superior in reducing the risk of having a dry socket (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.33; P = 0.17; 2 studies, 127 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  A further 21 intrasocket interventions to prevent dry socket were each evaluated in single studies, and there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects. Zinc oxide eugenol versus Alvogyl in the treatment of dry socket Two studies, with 80 participants, showed that Alvogyl (old formulation) is more effective than zinc oxide eugenol at reducing pain at day 7 (mean difference (MD) -1.40, 95% CI -1.75 to -1.04; P < 0.00001; 2 studies, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence) A further nine interventions for the treatment of dry socket were evaluated in single studies, providing insufficient evidence to determine their effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tooth extractions are generally undertaken by dentists for a variety of reasons, however, all but five studies included in the present review included participants undergoing extraction of third molars, most of which were undertaken by oral surgeons. There is moderate-certainty evidence that rinsing with chlorhexidine (0.12% and 0.2%) or placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) in the sockets of extracted teeth, probably results in a reduction in dry socket. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the other 21 preventative interventions each evaluated in single studies. There was limited evidence of very low certainty that Alvogyl (old formulation) may reduce pain at day 7 in patients with dry socket when compared to zinc oxide eugenol.

Periodontal Healing after Lower Third Molars Extraction: A Clinical Evaluation of Different Flap Designs

Periodontal healing after third molars extraction seems to be influenced by the choice of different flap techniques. The purpose of the present study was to assess the clinical condition of adjacent first and second molar sites, after the extraction of lower third molars, performed through different flap designs. Eighty patients, aged between 14 and 30 years, were analyzed for periodontal parameters of VPI, PPD, and CAL, pre-operatively (T0), after 15 days (T1), after 1 month (T2), and after 2 months (T3) from extraction. Techniques performed were trapezoidal flap (TRAP), marginal flap (MARG), flap with papilla detachment (DETP), and flap with papilla decapitation (DEC). No significant differences were found between the four flaps at each observation time and considering the interval between T0 and T3, for VPI, PPD at first molar site, PPD at second molar site, and CAL at second molar site. Significant variations for CAL were registered, for each flap, between T0 and T3, in all cases for buccal site, in three cases for buccal-distal site. After 2 months of follow-up, no strong evidence can be assumed for or against the use of a particular flap design for the extraction of lower third molars.

Distal-triangular flap design for impacted mandibular third molars: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This prospective study was performed to evaluate whether the distal-triangular flap was a practical alternative surgical approach for extracting mandibular third molars.

METHODS

Sixty participants with impacted mandibular third molars were randomly divided into three groups: group A, distal-triangular flap; group B, Szmyd flap; and group C, envelope flap. The impacted third molars were extracted by the corresponding flapping method. During a three-month follow-up observation after the extraction, the postoperative pain, swelling, mouth opening, and periodontal status were recorded and analyzed by ANOVA and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

The 60 participants had successful extraction and 3-month follow-up observation. No participant suffered from postoperative infections, lower lip disorder, or tongue sensory disorders. No statistical differences were found in the postoperative symptoms and signs of the three flap designs, such as postoperative pain, swelling, mouth opening, and periodontal status (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The distal-triangular flap was as safe and reliable as the Szmyd and envelope flaps but more advantageous because of its convenient operative field exposure and low requirement for the patient's mouth opening. Thus, the distal-triangular flap is one of the alternative flap options for extracting impacted mandibular third molars.

What are the implications of flap design on post-operative complications when carrying out third molar surgery?

Data sources The review carried out electronic searches using several online databases through November 2018, namely PubMed, Virtual Health Library, Cochrane Library and Scopus. Terms searched for on these databases included third molar, flap and variations thereof. A grey literature search was also conducted.Study selection In total, 2,455 articles were identified,1,449 being duplicates. Additionally, 1,006 articles remained for assessment which, with clear exclusion criteria listed, was reduced to 20. From the 20 incorporated into the review, 18 articles were utilised for meta-analysis. Three of the researchers were involved in assessing the articles after research management software was used to remove the aforementioned duplicates. A Cohen's kappa index was calculated to confirm inter-rater consistency using 10% of the articles.Data extraction and synthesis Data extraction followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidance.Results From their systematic review and meta-analyses, the authors found that flap design had no effect on common post-operative complications including pain, trismus, dehiscence, or osteitis. The triangular flap did, however, have greater post-operative ecchymosis but reduced periodontal probing depth on day seven when compared to the envelope flap in mandibular third molar surgeries.Conclusions Third molar surgery is carried out across all facets of dentistry, including general and specialised. Further studies must be carried out that look specifically at these variables utilising randomised controlled trials so a consensus can be achieved across the profession of which flap is of superior design.

Does Minimal-Invasive Envelope Flap Reduce Side Effects Compared to Conventional Envelope Flap Following Impacted Third Molar Surgery? A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

The surgical removal of impacted third molars can lead to various postoperative consequences, which can be influenced by modifiable factors such as flap design. The present study aimed to determine whether a minimal-invasive envelope flap (MIEF) can reduce surgical consequences and improve life quality compared to conventional envelope flap (CEF) after removing impacted mandibular third molars.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This single-blinded, cross-over randomized clinical trial was conducted on adult patients with bilateral, symmetrically impacted mandibular third molars. The flap design for surgical removal of the third molar was the primary predictor variable. The primary outcome (pain) and secondary outcome variables (swelling, mouth opening limitation [MOL]) were recorded daily and on the second and seventh days after the surgery, respectively. Wound dehiscence and patients' postoperative quality-of-life scores (PPOQL) were recorded on the seventh day. The data were analyzed by Kolmogorov-Smirnov and paired sample t test using SPSS version 22. The P value < .5 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight impacted third molars of 34 subjects with a mean age of 22 ± 12.9 years (35% females) were followed. The postoperative pain level in the MIEF group at rest (0.80 ± 0.53) and chewing (2.10 ± 1.32) up to fifth day was significantly (P value < .01) lower than CEF group (2.40 ± 1.12 and 3.05 ± 1.13, respectively). The difference did not reach a significant level at rest and chewing on the sixth and seventh days (P value > .05). On the seventh day, the subjects in the MIEF group showed a significantly (P value < .001) lower level of swelling (1.13 ± 0.11) and MOL (8.28 ± 4.17) than the CEF group (3.2 ± 2.1 and 12.67 ± 4.92, respectively). Based on the PPOQL scale, patients in the MIEF group (1.82 ± 1.31) expressed a better recovery period than the CEF group (3.5 ± 2.1) (P value < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the reduction of pain, swelling, MOL, and wound dehiscence in MIEF cases, the application of MIEF in surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars can lead to a significant reduction in postoperative consequences and also a noticeable improvement in PPOQL compared to CEF.

The influence of flap design on patients' experiencing pain, swelling, and trismus after mandibular third molar surgery: a scoping systematic review

Third molar removal surgery usually comes accompanied by postoperative discomfort, which could be influenced by the surgical approach chosen. This scoping systematic review aimed at compiling the available evidence focused on the influence of flap design, including envelope flap (EF), triangular flap (TF), and modified triangular flap (MTF), on postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus, as primary outcome measures, and any result mentioning healing promotion or delay, as secondary outcome measure, after mandibular third molar extraction surgery. An electronic search, complemented by a manual search, of articles published from 1999 to 2020 was conducted in the Medline (PubMed), EMBASE and Web of Science databases including human randomized controlled trials, prospective, and retrospective studies with at least 15 patients. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed either with the Cochrane’s Risk of Bias tool or with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Every step of the review was performed independently and in duplicate. The initial electronic search recovered 2102 articles. After applying the inclusion criteria, 12 articles were included. For patient’s perceived postoperative pain, TF and MTF frequently reported better results than EF. For swelling, the literature is divided, despite a trend favoring EF. For trismus, data showed that its occurrence is mostly associated with the duration of the surgery rather than with the chosen flap. For healing, the limited data is inconclusive. Finally, randomized studies showed a high risk of bias, whereas nonrandomized studies were mostly of good quality and low risk of bias. Although there was no clear consensus regarding the influence of different flap designs for third mandibular molar extraction on postoperative clinical morbidities; the surgeon’s experience, estimated surgical difficulty, molar position and orientation, and surg ery duration should be considered when choosing among the different flap designs.

Third molar surgery: Past, present, and the future

Third molar surgery is the most common ambulatory procedure done by oral and maxillofacial surgeons. Surgical approaches for the removal of third molars have been published since the 20th century. This article reviews the history and development of extraction techniques through a literature review. The literature was selected through a search of an electronic database. Key words for the Medline search were "mandibular/maxillary third molar," "impacted mandibular/maxillary third molar," "mandibular/maxillary third molar flap design," and "mandibular/maxillary third molar incision." The search was restricted to English-language articles. Additionally, a manual search in the major oral surgery journals and books was performed. The aim of this article is to examine the evolution of third molar surgery, recognize pioneering techniques, and compare these techniques to current approaches. Common approaches employed today are discussed and treatment philosophies with thoughts for future therapies are provided.

Modified envelope flap, a novel incision design, can relieve complications after extraction of fully horizontal impacted mandibular third molar

Background/purpose

Patients always suffer from dental extraction complications of fully horizontal impacted mandibular third molar, such as pain, swelling and limited mouth opening. A novel incision, modified envelope flap (MEF), was designed to alleviate the complications through minimizing the tissue injury during this surgery procedure.

Materials and methods

With indications of removing bilateral fully horizontal impacted mandibular the third molars, 40 patients were recruited and received dental extraction under incision with modified envelope flap (MEF) in one lateral and modified triangular flap (MTF) in the other lateral respectively. MEF incision was made along the buccal gingival sulcus from mesial to distal of the mandibular second molar with an extension to retromolar trigone at 45°inclination. As a control, traditional incision MTF was made starting with a vertical incision at the mesial buccal gingiva of the mandibular second molar with extension as MEF. Fully horizontal impacted mandibular third molar were extracted successfully. Surgery time and postoperative pain, swelling and mouth opening were recorded at day 1, 3, 7.

Results

There was no significant difference of the surgery time, pain, swelling (day 1) and mouth opening (day1) between MEF and MTF group (p > 0.05). However, the scores of swelling (day 3, 7) and mouth opening (day3, 7) of MEF group were much lower than that of MTF group (p < 0.05), indicating attenuated complications and quicker recovery.

Conclusion

With small injury, MEF hasn't prolong the surgery time but relieves complications after extraction of fully horizontal impacted mandibular third molar and might be a promising method compared with MTF.

Comparison of the Effect of Sling and Single Interrupted Sutures on Periodontal Parameters after Surgical Extraction of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars

Objectives:

This study aimed to compare the sling and single interrupted sutures regarding dehiscence, probing pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment loss (CAL) of adjacent second molars after surgical extraction of impacted or semi-impacted mandibular third molars.

Materials and Methods:

This randomized clinical trial, with a split-mouth design, involved 25 patients with similar bilateral impaction of their mandibular third molars. The same surgeon performed surgical procedures, including a triangular flap and osteotomy. After surgical extraction of third molars, the distal surface of the flap was sutured with sling sutures on one side and single interrupted sutures on the other side. The allocation of suture type to the side of the jaw was random, and the patient was blinded to it. Patients were examined for dehiscence after 7 and 14 days. The PPD and CAL were recorded at the baseline and after 17 weeks. Data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and generalized estimating equation (GEE) regression model.

Results:

The sling suture was significantly superior regarding the improvement of PPD (P=0.041) and CAL (P=0.016). The dehiscence was significantly smaller in the single interrupted suture group 7 days postoperatively (P=0.059). This difference was not significant 14 says postoperatively (P=0.852).

Conclusion:

The results of this study show that the sling suture was superior to the single interrupted suture regarding PPD and CAL. However, the technique of suturing does not seem to have a significant long-term effect on wound dehiscence.

Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth

BACKGROUND

Pathology relating to mandibular wisdom teeth is a frequent presentation to oral and maxillofacial surgeons, and surgical removal of mandibular wisdom teeth is a common operation. The indications for surgical removal of these teeth are alleviation of local pain, swelling and trismus, and also the prevention of spread of infection that may occasionally threaten life. Surgery is commonly associated with short-term postoperative pain, swelling and trismus. Less frequently, infection, dry socket (alveolar osteitis) and trigeminal nerve injuries may occur. This review focuses on the optimal methods in order to improve patient experience and minimise postoperative morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative benefits and risks of different techniques for surgical removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register (to 8 July 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library; 2019, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 8 July 2019), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 8 July 2019). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing different surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors were involved in assessing the relevance of identified studies, evaluated the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We used risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data in parallel-group trials (or Peto odds ratios if the event rate was low), odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data in cross-over or split-mouth studies, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data. We took into account the pairing of the split-mouth studies in our analyses, and combined parallel-group and split-mouth studies using the generic inverse-variance method. We used the fixed-effect model for three studies or fewer, and random-effects model for more than three studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 62 trials with 4643 participants. Several of the trials excluded individuals who were not in excellent health. We assessed 33 of the studies (53%) as being at high risk of bias and 29 as unclear. We report results for our primary outcomes below. Comparisons of different suturing techniques and of drain versus no drain did not report any of our primary outcomes. No studies provided useable data for any of our primary outcomes in relation to coronectomy. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether envelope or triangular flap designs led to more alveolar osteitis (OR 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 1.23; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence), wound infection (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.06; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence), or permanent altered tongue sensation (Peto OR 4.48, 95% CI 0.07 to 286.49; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). In terms of other adverse effects, two studies reported wound dehiscence at up to 30 days after surgery, but found no difference in risk between interventions. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the use of a lingual retractor affected the risk of permanent altered sensation compared to not using one (Peto OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.00 to 6.82; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). None of our other primary outcomes were reported by studies included in this comparison. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether lingual split with chisel is better than a surgical hand-piece for bone removal in terms of wound infection (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.21; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Alveolar osteitis, permanent altered sensation, and other adverse effects were not reported. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether there is any difference in alveolar osteitis according to irrigation method (mechanical versus manual: RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.09; 1 study) or irrigation volume (high versus low; RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.02; 1 study), or whether there is any difference in postoperative infection according to irrigation method (mechanical versus manual: RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.43; 1 study) or irrigation volume (low versus high; RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.37; 1 study) (all very low-certainty evidence). These studies did not report permanent altered sensation and adverse effects. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether primary or secondary wound closure led to more alveolar osteitis (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.40; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), wound infection (RR 4.77, 95% CI 0.24 to 96.34; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), or adverse effects (bleeding) (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.47; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). These studies did not report permanent sensation changes. Placing platelet rich plasma (PRP) or platelet rich fibrin (PRF) in sockets may reduce the incidence of alveolar osteitis (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.67; 2 studies), but the evidence is of low certainty. Our other primary outcomes were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this 2020 update, we added 27 new studies to the original 35 in the 2014 review. Unfortunately, even with the addition of these studies, we have been unable to draw many meaningful conclusions. The small number of trials evaluating each comparison and reporting our primary outcomes, along with methodological biases in the included trials, means that the body of evidence for each of the nine comparisons evaluated is of low or very low certainty. Participant populations in the trials may not be representative of the general population, or even the population undergoing third molar surgery. Many trials excluded individuals who were not in good health, and several excluded those with active infection or who had deep impactions of their third molars. Consequently, we are unable to make firm recommendations to surgeons to inform their techniques for removal of mandibular third molars. The evidence is uncertain, though we note that there is some limited evidence that placing PRP or PRF in sockets may reduce the incidence of dry socket. The evidence provided in this review may be used as a guide for surgeons when selecting and refining their surgical techniques. Ongoing studies may allow us to provide more definitive conclusions in the future.

Effect of drain application on postoperative complaints after surgical removal of impacted wisdom teeth-a randomized observer-blinded split-mouth clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this randomized observer-blinded split-mouth-study is to objectively assess the influence of a rubber drain on postoperative swelling using 3D face scans as measurement method and additionally evaluate pain, trismus and complications after the osteotomy of lower third molars.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Seventy-two patients with symmetrically impacted lower wisdom teeth were recruited. Before the operation, patients rated pain using the visual analogue scale, the interincisal distance was measured, and 3D face scans were taken with an optical scanner. Each patient underwent two procedures which were at least 30 days apart. On one side, a rubber drain was inserted randomly before closure, the contralateral control side was closed without drainage. On the third and tenth postoperative day, face scans to quantify the swelling, pain evaluation and trismus measurements were performed. Due to loss of follow-up, 32 patients were excluded which resulted in 40 out of 72 patients remaining in the study.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference in using a drain on swelling and trismus on the third and tenth day (p > 0.05). Pain was slightly worse on the third day on the treatment side, but the difference was not significant (p > 0.05). We observed no differences in the number of wound infections.

CONCLUSIONS

The insertion of a rubber drain does not have any influence on swelling, pain or trismus and has no impact on the number of wound infections.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of a rubber drain cannot be recommended as no reduction of postoperative discomfort was detected.

Patient morbidity after impacted third molar extraction with different flap designs. A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To review the literature on the effect of different surgical flaps upon patient morbidity (pain perception, trismus, swelling and osteitis) after impacted third molar extraction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic and complementary search of main databases and grey literature was performed up to January 2019 to retrieve randomized clinical trials. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used for methodological appraisal. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted of pain perception and trismus.

RESULTS

From the initially 1314 screened studies, only 11 were included in the qualitative synthesis, and 5 in the meta-analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in pain between the envelope and triangular flap designs over time, except on the sixth postoperative day, when the envelope flap proved more painful. Regarding trismus, statistically significant differences were observed on the seventh postoperative day, with greater mouth opening in the envelope flap group than in the triangular flap group. There were no clear differences in swelling and osteitis among the flap designs.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite its limitations, the present meta-analysis found no clear differences in patient morbidity between the different flap designs.

Envelope or triangular flap for surgical removal of third molars? A systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this systematic review was to compare the triangular and envelope flaps in mandibular third molar surgery with regard to pain, oedema, and trismus. Secondary outcomes assessed were dehiscence, ecchymosis, alveolar osteitis, periodontal condition, and surgical time. The PRISMA guidelines and recommendations in the Cochrane Handbook were followed, and the review was registered before commencement (PROSPERO; CRD42018112373). The literature search was conducted in the Web of Science, PubMed, Virtual Health Library, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases and in the grey literature; randomized clinical trials, indexed through November 2018 were included. Three reviewers independently examined the studies. Twenty studies were included in the qualitative analysis, of which 18 were included in the meta-analyses. The flap design did not influence pain, oedema, trismus, dehiscence, or osteitis. The triangular flap was associated with a greater occurrence of postoperative ecchymosis (odds ratio 4.58, 95% confidence interval 1.34 to 15.91, I²=0) and lower periodontal probing depth on day 7 postoperative (standardized mean difference -1.36, 95% confidence interval -2.68 to -0.03, I²=88%) when compared to the envelope flap in mandibular third molar surgeries.

Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Envelope and Triangular Flaps After Mandibular Third Molar Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

The objective of the present systematic review was to compare the postoperative outcomes between envelope and triangular flaps after mandibular third molar surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from the inception date to November 2018. Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials were included if they had met certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. The predictor variable was the flap design, envelope or triangular. The outcome variables were operation time, pain, trismus, alveolar osteitis (AO) incidence, wound dehiscence, and swelling. The methodologic quality assessment was performed in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager, version 5.2.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were included for qualitative synthesis, 18 of which were included in the meta-analysis. The use of envelope flaps required less operation time than triangular flaps (P < .00001; I² = 9%). In the Pell and Gregory A and B subgroups, envelope flaps were associated with a significantly lower visual analog scale score at 3 (P = .05, I² = 0%) and 7 (P = .02; I² = 0%) postoperative days and with a greater postoperative interincisal distance at 7 postoperative days (P = .04; I² = 0%). In contrast, envelope flaps were associated with a greater AO incidence in the subgroup of split-mouth randomized controlled trials (P = .001; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Envelope flaps required a shorter operation time than triangular flaps and were associated with less postoperative pain and trismus when applied to impacted mandibular third molars of Pell and Gregory Class A or B. In contrast, triangular flaps were associated with a decreased incidence of AO compared with envelope flaps.

Randomized clinical study comparing Piezoelectric Surgery with conventional rotatory osteotomy in mandibular third molars surgeries

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance and to assess the postoperative sequel and quality of life after removal of impacted mandibular third molars using piezoelectric surgery compared with conventional rotatory osteotomy.

Patients and methods

A single blinded, randomized, control clinical study was performed. Sixty-three patients (44 males, 19 females) who presented with bilaterally asymptomatic impacted mandibular third molars were included in this analysis. Each patient was treated, at two separate sessions approximately 4 weeks apart, with a conventional rotatory hand piece on one side of the mandible and a piezoelectric device on the contralateral side. Patients were followed up on postoperative days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 15 to rate the pain, swelling and trismus. Inferior alveolar nerve paresthesia was evaluated up to 12 months postoperatively.

Results

The severity of the pain, trismus and swelling using the piezosurgery were significantly different from the rotary group. In both groups, pain was most intense and peaked during the first post-operative day, while swelling and trismus reached peak levels on the third postoperative day. The piezoelectric procedure resulted in a significantly longer procedural duration compared to the rotatory surgery (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Piezoelectric surgery is considered a viable alternative technique compared to the conventional rotary systems and can improve a patient’s quality of life. Thus, piezoelectric surgery might be a preferred modality for patients undergoing complicated surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars.

The influence of flap design on sequelae and quality of life following surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars: A split-mouth randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar is one of the most frequently performed interventions in oral and maxillofacial surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To compare two different flap designs in terms of sequelae and quality of life following surgical removal of impacted third molars.

METHODS

This prospective, randomised, split-mouth clinical study involved patients referred for surgical removal of bilateral symmetrical impacted mandibular third molars. Envelope flap and modified triangular flap techniques were used. The effects of flap design on trismus, swelling, wound dehiscence, alveolar osteitis, haematoma, infection and quality of life were evaluated on post-operative days 3 and 7. Pain levels were assessed on post-operative days 1, 3 and 7.

RESULTS

Significant differences were determined between the two groups in terms of trismus, pain and wound dehiscence scores on post-operative day 3. However, on post-operative day 7, this difference was observed only in trismus. Statistically significant differences were also determined between the two groups on post-operative day 3 for social isolation and eating subscale scores as well as total quality of life score.

CONCLUSION

Based on the study findings, the modified triangular flap may be superior to the envelope flap in terms of pain, trismus, and wound dehiscence in the first 3 days after impacted third molar surgery and may have a better impact on quality of life during this process.

Is telephone follow-up really effective in early diagnosis of inflammatory complications after tooth extraction?

BACKGROUND

To establish whether telephone follow-up is really able to intercept post-extraction complications and to evaluate the degree of patient satisfaction with this kind of post-surgical monitoring.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

six hundred and thirty-eight patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a test or control group. Test group patients were monitored by telephone follow-up 24 and 72 hours after surgery to investigate the presence of local symptoms that are frequently associated with surgical wound infection and inflammation. Both test and control group patients were examined 7 days at suture removal. Patients with systemic diseases, those in which intra-operative accidents occurred during surgery and those for whom extraction suture was not required, were excluded.

RESULTS

At least one complication among alveolar osteitis, alveolar inflammation, alveolar infection and dehiscence involved 15.70% of the patients in the test group and 30.70% of the patients in the control group and telephone follow-up proved to be useful in early identification of anomalies in the post-extraction wound healing process. Comparable results were recorded in all extraction subgroups divided according to the type (surgical and non-surgical) and the number (single and multiple) of extractions performed in the same session. Telephone follow-up showed an 8.60 ± 1.17 (0 to 10 score scale) average acceptance. All cases of alveolar osteitis and infection occurred in patients who underwent antibiotic prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

Telephone follow-up seems to allow early detection of any possible wound healing complications, it is widely accepted by patients and it could therefore be considered a valid method for wound healing monitoring after tooth extractions, due to its effectiveness, feasibility and low costs.

Morbidity following transcrestal and lateral sinus floor elevation: A randomized trial

Aim

To comparatively evaluate the morbidity following maxillary sinus floor elevation according to either transcrestal (tSFE) or lateral (lSFE) approach with concomitant implant placement.

Materials & Methods

Patients with ≥1 edentulous maxillary posterior site with residual bone height (RBH) of 3–6 mm were enrolled. tSFE was performed in association with a xenograft and a collagen matrix. For lSFE, the sinus was grafted with the xenograft, and the antrostomy was covered with a membrane. Implants were inserted concomitantly. The postoperative course was assessed through questionnaires. Pain level (VAS_pain) was recorded using a 100‐mm visual analogue scale.

Results

Twenty‐nine and 28 patients were included in tSFE and lSFE group, respectively. On the day of surgery, VAS_pain was significantly higher for tSFE compared to lSFE, and similar from day 1 to 14. tSFE was characterized by significantly lower incidence of swelling, bruising and nasal discharge/bleeding. Significantly less severe limitation in swallowing, continuing daily activities, eating, speaking, opening the mouth and going to school/work was found for tSFE only at specific postsurgery intervals.

Conclusions

lSFE was associated with lower pain on the day of surgery, and tSFE revealed lower postoperative morbidity as well as more tolerable postoperative course.

The flap recovery on the impacted lower third molar surgery comparing 3 different flap designs: a clinical study

Aim

The purpose of the study was to analyze the healing of the deep and superficial lower first and second molars periodontium, after the surgical extraction of the contiguous impacted third molar, comparing 3 mucoperiosteal flap designs.

Materials and methods

150 patients which had to undergo a impacted lower third molar surgery were enrolled in this study. They were checked from day 0 to day 90, in order to focus on the recovery quality of the soft tissues around the lower second molar, comparing 3 different flap designs.

Results

No intraoperatory incident happened. The complete recovery of the periodontium around the second molar has been shown in each patient after 90 days from surgery and each adverse reaction happened within the sixth week after surgery. Only 2 slight gengival recessions 0,5 mm have been find out.

Conclusions

The impacted third molar surgery is an operation that, if rightly programmed and performed, is relatively safe. Besides, the correct handling and management of periodontium around the second molar and the choice of the flap type to be used support a correct recovery on the second molar periodontium, avoiding any long-term damage.

Clinical significance

This study wanted to analyze the healing of the deep and superficial lower second molar periodontium, after the impacted lower third molar surgery. In order to improve the surgical technique used for lower third molar germectomies, we wanted to compare 3 different kind of flap designs.

A novel method in the removal of impacted mandibular third molar: buccal drainage

Food impaction after impacted mandibular third molar extraction is a serious problem that should not be ignored. Incomplete suturing of the distal incision in the conventional method is the main cause of food impaction and delayed wound healing. The present study introduces a novel suture and drainage technology that requires hermetic suturing of the distal incision and rubber drainage for buccal drainage. 76 patients with horizontally/mesially impacted third molars (bilateral) were enrolled in this prospective study. An impacted tooth on one side of each patient was extracted by occlusal drainage using the conventional method, whereas the other side tooth was extracted by buccal drainage using the novel method. The differences in wound healing, facial swelling, bleeding and dry socket between the two sides of each patient were compared postoperatively, and the trends for patient selection of the surgical method were also compared. The results indicated that buccal drainage had obvious advantages in wound healing and reduced the risk of postoperative bleeding, and most patients preferred this technique; there were no significant differences in postoperative facial swelling or pain. Thus, buccal drainage can solve the problem of long-term food impaction induced by traditional incision postoperatively and is worthy of clinical promotion.

Effect of flap design and duration of surgery on acute postoperative symptoms and signs after extraction of lower third molars: A randomized prospective study

Background. Different surgical variables are assumed to play a role in postoperative course after lower third molar extraction. The aim of study was to assess whether flap design and duration of surgery can influence acute postoperative symptoms and signs after lower third molar extraction.

Methods. Twenty-five patients scheduled for lower third molar extraction were included in this study and randomly assigned to two groups in terms of flap design: group A (envelope flap) and group B (triangular flap). Swelling and trismus were assessed before and after surgery on days 0, 2 and 7. Pain was assessed for seven days after surgery. Maximum postoperative pain was chosen as the main outcome variable. ANOVA was used to assess differences between the groups regarding maximum postoperative pain, trismus and swelling at 2- and 7-day intervals. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to assess correlation between duration of surgery and postoperative symptoms and signs.

Results. No significant difference was found between the two flap designs for any postoperative symptoms and signs. The duration of surgery was found to be correlated with both trismus (r = -0.44, P = 0.04) and swelling (r = 0.59, P = 0.004) as assessed 2 days after surgery. No associations were found between duration of surgery and maximum postoperative pain and trismus and swelling at 7-day interval.

Conclusion. Within the limits of the present study, the duration of surgery, and not the flap design, affected the acute postoperative symptoms and signs after lower third molar extraction.

Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Flap Designs and Postoperative Outcome in the Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar

AIM

The aim of this study is to compare triangular and envelope flap designs and the postoperative outcome in the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 50 participants were assessed clinically and were divided randomly into two groups. Group I (participants operated by triangular flap) and group II (participants operated by envelope flap), with 25 participants each between the age group of 20 and 30 years. Patient satisfaction was assessed subjectively using a graded scale from very satisfied to very unsatisfied. The degree of pain was recorded for 7 days with reference to predefined values on visual analog scale (VAS). Trismus was evaluated on the day 3, day 5, and day 7 of the postoperative period in millimeters. Quantitative data were analyzed by unpaired t-test and qualitative data were by Fischer's exact test.

RESULTS

The mean overall age is 25.5 years. There was no statistically significant difference between the study groups with respect to age. There was no significant association between the patient satisfaction and flap type (p = 0.684). A significant difference between the study groups on 4th, 5th, and 6th days with respect to pain was observed, wherein fewer subjects operated with triangular flap reported pain. A highly significant difference in mouth opening was observed, with triangular flap group participants having a higher mouth opening than envelope flap subjects on day 7.

CONCLUSION

The present study indicated that participants operated by triangular flap had a better mouth opening postoperatively compared with envelope flap participants, whereas there were no significant differences in patient satisfaction and pain scores at the end of the 7th day after third molar surgery.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Flap design is a significant factor in the surgical removal of impacted third molar, and it influences the severity of complications. Furthermore, it is important for allowing optimal visibility and access to the impacted tooth and also for subsequent healing of the surgically created defect.

Evaluation of two flap designs on the mandibular second molar after third molar extractions

BACKGROUND

The extraction of third molars is associated with some clinical outcomes and periodontal problems. It is imperative to note that the type of incision used in the surgery for the removal of the impacted third molar is critical. The design of the flap influences the healing of the surgically created defect and damage to the distal periodontal area of the adjacent second molar. However, till date, there have been conflicting reports on the influence of different flap designs used for the surgical removal of impacted third molars.

AIM

The present study aimed to comparatively evaluate the clinical outcomes and periodontal status of the adjacent second molar, when two different flap designs, namely, the envelope and the modified triangular flap designs were used.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty female patients with bilateral impacted third molars completed the study with envelope flap on one side and modified triangular flap design on the other side of the mandible for third molar removal. Clinical parameters including pain, dehiscence and swelling were assessed postoperatively and periodontal probing depth (PPD) on the distal aspect of adjacent second molar were assessed both pre- and post-operatively.

RESULTS

The results were assessed on 1, 3 and 8 days for pain using visual analog scale. The subjective perception of swelling was evaluated on 3, 7 and 15 days postoperatively in a similar manner. The results of the periodontal parameters were evaluated both preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively, with cautious exploration using a University of North Carolina (UNC)-15 periodontal probe. The statistically significant results for swelling and PPD were noted for the two flap groups using the Chi-square test (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The study revealed that the modified triangular flap had lesser postoperative PPDs and dehiscence. The envelope flap was better when swelling was analyzed. The pain scores, though slightly higher for the modified triangular flap group, were not statistically significant.

Effect of flap design on periodontal healing after impacted third molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The extraction of an impacted third molar violates the surrounding soft and bony tissues. The surgeon's access to the tooth, for which there are various surgical approaches, has an important impact on the periodontium of the adjacent second molar. The aim of this review was to analyze the relationships between the different flap techniques and postoperative periodontal outcomes for the mandibular second molars (LM2) adjacent to the impacted mandibular third molars (LM3). An electronic search of MEDLINE and other databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials fulfilling the eligibility criteria. To assess the impact of flap design on the periodontal condition, the weighted mean difference of the probing depth reduction (WDPDR) and the weighted mean difference of the clinical attachment level gain (WDCAG) at the distal surface of LM2 were used as the primary outcomes. The results showed that, overall, the different flap techniques had no significant impact on the probing depth reduction (WDPDR -0.14mm, 95% confidence interval -0.44 to 0.17), or on the clinical attachment level gain (WDCAG 0.05mm, 95% confidence interval -0.84 to 0.94). However, a subgroup analysis revealed that the Szmyd and paramarginal flap designs may be the most effective in reducing the probing depth in impacted LM3 extraction, and the envelope flap may be the least effective.

Postoperative socket irrigation with drinking tap water reduces the risk of inflammatory complications following surgical removal of third molars: a multicenter randomized trial

Objectives

The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of postoperative irrigation of the socket with drinking tap water on inflammatory complications following lower third molar removal.

Material and methods

A multicenter randomized controlled trial was carried out from June 2013 to June 2014. In one arm of the study, patients were instructed to irrigate the tooth socket and surgical site with a Monoject® Curved 412 Tip Syringe (Tyco/healthcare-Kendall, Mansfield, MA, USA) with tap water. In a second arm of the study, the standard postoperative instructions did not include irrigation instructions. The incidences of alveolar osteitis and wound infection were recorded for each group and analyzed by the Fisher’s exact test.

Results

A total of 280 patients with 333 mandibular third molars were analyzed. According to the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, inflammatory complications occurred in 18 cases in the Monoject® group (11.4 %) compared to 34 cases (19.1 %) in the control group (p = 0.04). These complications were associated with significant worse outcomes regarding quality of life, pain, and trismus and caused significantly more missed days of work or study. Female gender, age >26, bone removal, deep impacted third molars, less experienced surgeons, and a high amount of debris at the surgical site were also identified as risk factors for developing inflammatory complications following lower third molar removal.

Conclusion

Irrigation of the surgical site with drinking tap water using a curved syringe following removal of third molars is effective in reducing the risk of inflammatory complications.

Clinical relevance

Water is a very accessible, cost-effective irrigant without side effects and the results from this study have proven that it can be used to reduce the risk of inflammatory complications and associated morbidity following lower third molar removal.

Postsurgical consequences in lower third molar surgical extraction using micromotor and piezosurgery

Background:

One of the most critical and crucial steps in surgical extraction is cutting the bone or osteotomy, for which many techniques are used, e.g., chisels and mallet, rotary instruments, and ultrasound bone-cutting instruments. If they are not used judiciously, they can be hazardous.

Objectives:

To assess the efficiency of piezosurgery unit over micromotor while performing surgical extraction of lower third molars by assessing the time taken for the surgery and measuring postoperative parameters such as pain, trismus, and swelling.

Materials and Methods:

Thirty patients having bilateral impacted third molars with the same difficulty index were selected for the study. One side surgical removal was done using micromotor and other side by piezosurgery with an interval of 15 days. After each surgery, time taken to finish was measured and patients were followed up on postoperative days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 15 for assessing pain, trismus, and swelling. Data obtained were statistically analyzed.

Results:

The mean time taken for the micromotor group is 37.90 min whereas by the piezosurgery group is 54.63 min, showing a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001). Furthermore, there is statistically significant difference (P < 0.001) in the level of pain, trismus, and swelling on postoperative days 1, 3, 5, and 7. Even the intragroup comparison of piezosurgical group for trismus and swelling showed no statistically significant difference on postoperative day 7, indicating faster recovery of trismus and swelling. On postoperative day 15, there was no difference in any parameter in both groups indicating complete symptom-free recovery in both groups.

Conclusion:

It takes more time to perform surgical extraction of third molars when piezosurgical unit is used. Despite that, it causes less pain postoperatively with faster improvement in trismus and quicker reduction in swelling.

Wound Dehiscence after Wisdom Tooth Removal in Mandibular Mesioangular Class IB Impactions: Triangular Transposition Flap versus Envelope Flap

Background and aims. Wound dehiscence after lower third molar surgery extends the postoperative treatment period and may cause long-standing pain. The aim of this study was to compare wound dehiscence after removal of wisdom teeth in the most prevalent mandibular impaction (mesioangular class IB) by two different soft tissue flap designs.

Materials and methods. Partially-erupted mandibular third molars with mesioangular class IB impaction (Pell and Gregory classification) were selected. Split mouth technique was used to compare the two flap designs (envelope vs. triangular transposition flap—TTF). The patients were recalled one week and a month later and rechecked for dehiscence, infection, and dry socket formation.

Results. There were no cases of infection in either group. However, three cases of dry socket in the envelope group and four in the TTF group were recorded. In the envelope group, dehiscence occurred in 43% of cases during the first week, with 67% of cases being a large dehiscence (diameters of more than 5 mm). Extra appointments (those requested by the patient exclusively related to the problem of the hole distal to the second molar) were scheduled in 10% of cases in the envelope group. In the TTF group, dehiscence occurred during the first week for the same impaction in 19% of cases with large dehiscence cases occurring in 65% of cases and extra appointment rate at 4.1%.

Conclusion. According to theresults in the evaluated operation, TTF may prevent postoperative wound dehiscence more probably than the envelope flap.

Comparison of a new flap design with the routinely used triangular flap design in third molar surgery

The aim of this study is to introduce a new flap design in the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars - a lingually based triangular flap - and to compare this flap design with the routinely used triangular flap. This randomized, prospective, split-mouth study involved 22 patients with impacted bilateral mandibular third molars that were symmetrically positioned, mesially angulated, and retained in bone. The impacted teeth were removed in two sessions, using two different flap designs: the new alternative flap and the traditional triangular flap. Postoperative complications (pain, swelling, trismus, alveolar osteitis, and wound dehiscence) were recorded on days 2, 7, 14, and 21. The data obtained were analysed using the χ(2) test, the Mann-Whitney U-test, and Pearson's correlation. In terms of the severity of postoperative facial swelling and trismus, there were no statistically significant differences between the flap designs (P>0.05). The alternative flap exhibited higher pain scores at 12h post-surgery (P<0.05). In addition, the alternative flap group exhibited less wound dehiscence, although this was not statistically significant. Moreover, all wound dehiscence in this group occurred on sound bone. In conclusion, these results show that this new flap design is preferable to the routinely used flap for impacted third molar surgery.

Effect of the suture technique on postoperative pain, swelling and trismus after removal of lower third molars: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the intensity of pain, swelling and trismus after the removal of impacted lower third molars comparing two different suture techniques of the triangular flap: the complete suture of the distal incision and relieving incision and the partial suture with only one suture knot for closure of the corner of the flap and the closure of the distal incision, without suturing the relieving incision.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective, randomized, cross-over clinical trial was conducted in 40 patients aged from 18 to 45 years who underwent surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars at the Department of Oral Surgery in the Odontological Hospital of the University of Barcelona during the year 2011. Patients were randomly divided in 2 groups. Two different techniques (hermetical closure and partial closure of the wound) were performed separated by a one month washout period in each patient. Postoperative pain, swelling and trismus were evaluated prior to the surgical procedure and also at 2 and 7 days postoperatively.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed for pain (p<0.06), trismus (p<0.71) and swelling (p<0.05) between the test and the control group. However, the values of the three parameters related to the test group were lower than those for the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Partial closure of the flap without suturing the relieving incision after surgical extraction of lower third molars reduces operating time and it does not produce any postoperative complications compared with complete closure of the wound.

Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth

BACKGROUND

The surgical removal of mandibular wisdom teeth is one of the most common operations undertaken in oral and maxillofacial surgery. The most common indication for surgery is infection about a partially erupted tooth that is impacted against bone or soft tissues. Other indications include unrestorable caries, pulpal and periapical pathology, fracture of the tooth and cyst development, amongst others. Most commonly the benefits of surgical removal of a wisdom tooth include alleviation of the symptoms and signs of pericoronitis and its potential consequences. However, surgery is frequently associated with postoperative pain, swelling and trismus. Less commonly complications include infection, including dry socket, trigeminal nerve injuries and rarely fracture of the mandible.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative benefits and risks of different techniques for undertaking various aspects or stages of the surgical extraction of mandibular wisdom teeth.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 21 March 2014), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 1), MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to 21 March 2014) and EMBASE (OVID) (1980 to 21 March 2014). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication in the electronic searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing surgical techniques for removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors conducted assessment of relevance, risk of bias and data extraction. Study authors were contacted for additional information. RRs were used for dichotomous data and MDs for continuous data, unless the event rate was very low and Peto ORs were used. The pairing of the split-mouth studies was taken into account in the analysis for both dichotomous and continuous outcomes, and parallel group and split-mouth studies were combined using the generic inverse variance method. Random-effects models were used provided there were more than three studies (fixed-effect models otherwise).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 35 trials (2569 patients) were included. The interventions under consideration fell into seven broad categories, with many comparisons including only a small number of trials. Twenty-one of the trials were assessed at high risk of bias, the remaining 14 as unclear. The results are described in the summary of findings tables.Triangular flaps were associated with a 71% reduction in alveolar osteitis at one week (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.78; three trials, moderate quality) and reduction in pain at 24 hours (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.10; two trials, moderate quality) compared with envelope flaps. There was no evidence of a difference in overall infection rates, in maximum mouth opening or in permanent sensation. However, there was some evidence that residual swelling after one week was slightly increased in the triangular flap groups compared to envelope flap types (MD 0.66 mm, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.07; two trials, low quality). We found no data on temporary sensation, or adverse events.There was low quality evidence from two studies, looking at the use of a retractor during third molar surgery, to indicate more cases of temporary altered sensation (up to one month) when a retractor was used (Peto OR 5.19, 95% CI 1.38 to 19.49; two trials, low quality). One study reported that this did not persist for more than six months in either group. We found no data for use of a retractor on other primary outcomes or adverse effects (including fracture of the mandible).Due to the small number of studies, the different comparisons evaluated, the variable outcomes reported and the paucity of useful data for all primary outcomes we were not able to draw any conclusions concerning bone removal in third molar surgery.There was insufficient evidence from single studies of very low quality on irrigation method (manual versus mechanical) or irrigation volume (low or high) to determine whether there were differences or not for the outcomes of alveolar osteitis or postoperative infection. We found no data for any of the other primary outcomes.There was insufficient evidence (low to very low quality) that any wound closure technique (primary versus secondary) was superior to another for the outcomes of alveolar osteitis, postoperative infection or maximum mouth opening achieved after seven days, or reactionary bleeding. There was evidence that secondary wound closure was associated with reduced pain at 24 hours (MD 0.79, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.24; four trials, moderate quality) and slightly reduced swelling after one week (MD 0.33, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.57; seven trials, moderate quality).We found no data on other primary outcomes.There was some evidence that the use of a surgical drain was associated with less postoperative swelling (MD -0.90, 95% CI -1.62 to -0.19; five trials, moderate quality) and greater maximum mouth opening one week after surgery (MD 3.72 mm, 95% CI 2.84 to 4.59; two trials, moderate quality). There was insufficient evidence from a single study (low quality) to determine whether the presence of a drain made any difference to pain at 24 hours postoperation. There were no data for the other primary outcomes.Although two RCTs compared coronectomy with complete extraction, flaws in the design and the unit of analysis of these studies meant that there were no reliable data available for inclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The thirty-five included trials looked at a range of different surgical techniques. The comparisons related to seven broad aspects of the surgical procedures for impacted mandibular third molars: type of surgical flap raised, use of retractors, techniques for bone removal, wound irrigation, wound closure, wound drainage, and complete/incomplete tooth removal. The quality of the body of evidence for each of these comparisons was very low to moderate due to the small number of trials and patients, and the majority of the trials being at high risk of bias (65%) with the remainder at unclear risk of bias.The evidence for making changes to surgical practice is therefore limited. However, it is useful to describe the state of the research evidence supporting practice so that surgeons can make an informed choice in adopting new techniques, or continuing with established techniques.

Comparison of two incision designs for surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar: A randomized comparative clinical study

Objective:

The objective of this study is to investigate the influence of flap design on visibility and accessibility during removal of impacted third molar and hematoma formation, wound gaping and healing of flap post-operatively.

Study Design:

The randomized prospective comparative study included 30 patients with impacted mandibular third molars. Two flap designs namely envelope flap (Koener's incision) and ‘triangular flap’ (Ward's incision) were used. After 7 days, sutures were removed and status of wound, periodontal health, and progress of healing was assessed. Patients were followed through 15 days to judge the incidence of post-operative complications in both groups.

Results:

No statistical differences were noted between the groups in terms of visibility, accessibility, excessive bleeding during surgery, healing of flap, sensitivity of adjacent teeth, and dry socket. A statistically significant difference was observed in post-operative hematoma, wound gaping, and distal pocket in adjacent tooth, which was significant in Ward's triangular incision group in comparison to Koeiner's envelope incision group.

Conclusion:

The selection of the flap design is dependent on needs of the case and preference of the operating surgeon and does not seem to have a significant influence on the health of tissues. In order to avoid wide area of exposure of bone, the operating surgeon should clinically and radiographically assess the designing of incision and mucoperiosteal flap, the clinical relevance is still debatable.

To compare standard incision and comma shaped incision and its influence on post-operative complications in surgical removal of impacted third molars

OBJECTIVES

To compare standard incision and comma shaped incision and its influence on post operative complications in surgical removal of impacted third molar.

METHODS

This was a cross-over trial. Twenty subjects with bilateral impacted mandibular third molars were recruited for the study. A standard incision was made on one side of the lower jaw and a comma incision was made on the other side to reflect the mucoperiosteal flap, after which the common steps for removal of impacted third molars were followed. The post- operative parameters were recorded immediately on the post -operative days 1, 3 and 7 respectively.

RESULTS

The pain scores which were recorded on days 1, 3 and 7 in the surgical area with comma incisions were found to be significantly lower as compared to the pain scores in the area where standard incisions were made. Similarly, swelling was lesser with comma incisions than with standard incisions. There was a significant difference in mouth opening between the two incisions on day 1, but no significance was seen on days 3 and 7. All these findings showed significant statistical differences.

CONCLUSION

The results of the study showed that the new incision design was preferable over the conventional method, considering the lesser degree of post-operative complications. The cross-over design of the study greatly enhanced its statistical power and validity.

Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket)

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a complication of dental extractions and occurs more commonly in extractions involving mandibular molar teeth. It is associated with severe pain developing 2 to 3 days postoperatively, a socket that may be partially or totally devoid of blood clot and in some patients there may be a complaint of halitosis. It can result in an increase in postoperative visits.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of local interventions for the prevention and treatment of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) following tooth extraction.

SEARCH METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 29 October 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 10), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 29 October 2012) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 29 October 2012). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. We also searched the reference lists of articles and contacted experts and organisations to identify any further studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of adults over 18 years of age who were having permanent teeth extracted or who had developed dry socket post-extraction. We included studies with any type of local intervention used for the prevention or treatment of dry socket, compared to a different local intervention, placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies reporting on systemic use of antibiotics or the use of surgical techniques for the management of dry socket because these interventions are evaluated in separate Cochrane reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently undertook risk of bias assessment and data extraction in duplicate for included studies using pre-designed proformas. Any reports of adverse events were recorded and summarised into a table when these were available. We contacted trial authors for further details where these were unclear. We followed The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines and reported dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For some of the split-mouth studies with sparse data it was not possible to calculate RR so we calculated the exact odds ratio instead. We used the GRADE tool to assess the quality of the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one trials with 2570 participants met the inclusion criteria; 18 trials with 2376 participants for the prevention of dry socket and three studies with 194 participants for the treatment of dry socket. The risk of bias assessment identified six studies at high risk of bias, 14 studies at unclear risk of bias and one studies at low risk of bias. When compared to placebo, rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinses (0.12% and 0.2% concentrations) both before and after extraction(s) prevented approximately 42% of dry socket(s) with a RR of 0.58 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.78; P < 0.001) (four trials, 750 participants, moderate quality of evidence). The prevalence of dry socket varied from 1% to 5% in routine dental extractions to upwards of 30% in surgically extracted third molars. The number of patients needed to be treated with (0.12% and 0.2%) chlorhexidine rinse to prevent one patient having dry socket (NNT) was 232 (95% CI 176 to 417), 47 (95% CI 35 to 84) and 8 (95% CI 6 to 14) for control prevalences of dry socket of 1%, 5% and 30% respectively.Compared to placebo, placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) after extractions prevented approximately 58% of dry socket(s) with a RR of 0.42 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.87; P = 0.02) (two trials, in 133 participants, moderate quality of evidence). The number of patients needed to be treated with chlorhexidine gel to prevent one patient having dry socket (NNT) was 173 (95% CI 127 to 770), 35 (95% CI 25 to 154) and 6 (95% CI 5 to 26) for control prevalences of dry socket of 1%, 5% and 30% respectively.A further 10 intrasocket interventions to prevent dry socket were each evaluated in single studies, and therefore there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects. Five interventions for the treatment of dry socket were evaluated in a total of three studies providing insufficient evidence to determine their effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most tooth extractions are undertaken by dentists for a variety of reasons, however, all but three studies included in the present review included participants undergoing extraction of third molars, most of which were undertaken by oral surgeons. There is some evidence that rinsing with chlorhexidine (0.12% and 0.2%) or placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) in the sockets of extracted teeth, provides a benefit in preventing dry socket. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the other 10 preventative interventions each evaluated in single studies. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of any of the interventions to treat dry socket. The present review found some evidence for the association of minor adverse reactions with use of 0.12%, 0.2% and 2% chlorhexidine mouthrinses, though most studies were not designed to detect the presence of hypersensitivity reactions to mouthwash as part of the study protocol. No adverse events were reported in relation to the use of 0.2% chlorhexidine gel placed directly into a socket (though previous allergy to chlorhexidine was an exclusion criterion in these trials). In view of recent reports in the UK of two cases of serious adverse events associated with irrigation of dry socket with chlorhexidine mouthrinse, it is recommended that all members of the dental team prescribing chlorhexidine products are aware of the potential for both minor and serious adverse side effects.