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

Comparison of Buccal and Lingual-Based Triangular Flap During Mandibular Third Molar Extraction for Reducing Postoperative Complications: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Surgical removal of the mandibular third molar requires reflection of the mucoperiosteal flap. Several studies have suggested different varieties and innovative designs for flap reflection. We have designed a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to check the feasibility of two flap designs: lingual-based triangular flap (LBTF) and buccal-based triangular flap (BBTF) by calculating the duration of surgery and evaluating postoperative complications such as pain, swelling, and trismus.

Materials and Method

It was a non-inferiority parallel-group RCT. The trial was registered in the Control Trial Register of India (CTRI/2021/10/037182) and was performed according to Consolidated Standards of Registered Trial (CONSORT) guidelines. Intraoperative surgery time and postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus were measured and analyzed by a two-sample t test. The Chi-square test was used to measure gender distribution in the study.

Result

Of the total of 88 required subjects, gender distribution and performed surgical time were statistically insignificant with a p-value of 0.76 and 0.48, respectively. The pain was significantly higher in the LBTF group in the 5th and 7th postoperative days with a p-value of 0.02 and 0.028. The swelling was statistically higher during all the follow-ups except for the 28th day in the LBTF group with values of 0.006, 0.002 and 0.003, respectively. There was no significant difference in inter-incisional distance (IID) between the groups during postoperative check-ups.

Conclusion

LBTF shows no edge over BBTF during mandibular third molar disimpaction.

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.

Effects of collagen membrane on bone level and periodontal status of adjacent tooth after third molar surgery: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The periodontal status and distal bone level of the adjacent second molar can be negatively affected by the surgical extraction of an impacted lower third molar. Absorbable materials have some benefits, including enhancing primary wound coverage and promoting wound healing through isolation, clotting, wound stabilization and haemostasis. This study set out to compare primary and secondary healing and collagen-membrane-based primary healing after surgical removal of partially erupted impacted third molars (3Ms), evaluating the distal alveolar bone level (ABL) and periodontal status of the adjacent second molars (2Ms).

METHODS

Patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomized into three groups: secondary healing (n = 28), primary healing (n = 27) and membrane-based primary healing (n = 29). Digital panoramic radiographs were obtained preoperatively (T1) and three months postoperatively (T2). The distances between the cemento-enamel junctions and the alveolar bone crests on the distal aspects of the adjacent 2Ms were measured using calibrated radiograph measurement software. The pocket depth and plaque index measurements were performed preoperatively and three months postoperatively. The periodontal plaque index (PPI) scores were registered on the distal aspects of the 2Ms, and the mean values were used.

RESULTS

Three of the applied healing types positively affected periodontal pocket depth (PPD) and periodontal index values (p < 0.05). In terms of the ABL of the adjacent 2Ms, primary healing (p < 0.05) and membrane-based primary healing (p < 0.05) had superior results to secondary healing.

CONCLUSION

Membrane use is promising for the distal bone gain and periodontal status of the adjacent 2M.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This clinical study was registered by the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, with the trial number ACTRN12618001551280.

Comparison of buccal based triangular flap and lingual based triangular flap on postoperative course after impacted mandibular third molar surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study

Introduction: The present study is to compare the buccal based triangular flap with lingual based triangular flap on postoperative pain, swelling and trismus after mandibular third molar surgery. Materials and methods: This study comprised of 100 patients, of which, 50 patients underwent buccal based triangular flap technique and 50 patients underwent lingual based triangular flap. The patients in both the groups were evaluated for pain, swelling and trismus on 1st, 3rd and 7th postoperative days. The wound healing was assessed on the 7th postoperative day. The obtained data's were statistically analyzed using SPSS software. Results: Patients in lingual based triangular flap group had less pain on all three postoperative days (P < 0.001). While, the amount of swelling was less on the 3rd postoperative day (P < 0.05) and the degree of trismus was less on 1st and 3rd postoperative days (P < 0.05). The patients in buccal based triangular flap group showed statistical significance for swelling on 1st and 7th postoperative days (P < 0.05) and for trismus on 7th postoperative day (P < 0.05). 2 Patients reported with tissue dehiscence in lingual based triangular flap group. In buccal based triangular flap group, 7 patients presented with wound gaping and 2 patients developed dry socket. Conclusion: Lingual based triangular flap was found to be superior and effective flap design in controlling pain, swelling and trismus with reduced postoperative complications when compared to buccal based triangular flap.

Clinical Evaluation of Intraoral Suture Patterns Using Poliglecaprone 25 in Greyhound Dogs

To evaluate healing and complications of extraction sites closed with a simple interrupted pattern (SI) and a simple continuous (SC) suture pattern in a prospective randomized clinical trial. Greyhounds were selected from a rescue with a standardized environment and naturally occurring disease. Surgical extractions were performed (35 sites) and all mucogingival flaps were closed with 4-0 poliglecaprone 25 using either SI or SC randomly assigned by surgical site. Oral healing/dehiscence, suture inflammation, suture loss, accumulation of debris, presence/nature of discharge, necrotic tissue and adjacent contact ulceration were evaluated. Fisher's exact test was used to compare categorical data and two-tail T tests used to compare continuous data. Results showed SC was faster to apply. No new dehiscence events were detected after Recheck 1. There was no significant difference for dehiscence scores between SI and SC. A trend was seen towards more major dehiscence in the SI group. This study concluded SC is an alternative to SI for closure of occlusal surfaces in the mouth. Mandibular canine tooth extraction sites were more likely to have a high dehiscence score than all other sites combined regardless of surgical technique.

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.

Influence of Surgical Flap Design (Envelope and Szmyd) for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars on Clinical Periodontal Parameters: A Clinical Trial

The aim of the study was to assess the influence of flap designs (Envelope flap (EF) and Szmyd flap (SF)) for impacted mandibular third molar extraction, on periodontal pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment loss (CAL) and bone levels (BL) of second molar. Sixty patients indicated for third molar extractions with healthy second molars were allocated into two groups: EF and SF (n = 30). Third molars were assessed for angulation, root patterns, depth of impactions and relation with ramus (Pell and Gregory classification). Extraction of third molars was performed and PPD, CAL and BL around second molars at 0, 3 and 6 month (mon) follow-ups (FU) were assessed clinically and radiographically. ANOVA, Chi-square and Fisher’s exact test were employed to compare periodontal factors between EF and SF groups, considering p ≤ 0.05 as significant. Sixty participants with a mean age of 23.22 ± 3.17 were included in the study. Based on angulation, the most common impaction in the EF and SF groups was mesio-angular (EF, 50%; SF, 36.7%). Buccal and distal PPD showed a significant increase (p < 0.001) in both EF and SF patients from baseline to 6 mon. EF patients showed significantly higher distal and buccal CAL (6.67 ± 0.18 mm; 6.91 ± 0.17 mm) and BL (7.64 ± 0.16 mm; 7.90 ± 0.15 mm) as compared to SF patients (CAL, 6.76 ± 0.26 mm; 6.91 ± 0.17 mm-BL, 7.42 ± 0.38 mm; 7.34 ± 0.34 mm) at 6 mon FU. SF showed better soft tissue attachment (PPD and CAL) and bone stability (less bone loss) around second molars compared to EF after third molar extractions regardless of the patient, tooth and operator factors.

Does the Lingual-Based Mucoperiosteal Flap Reduce Postoperative Morbidity Compared With the Buccal-Based Mucoperiosteal Flap After the Surgical Removal of Impacted Third Molars? A Meta-analysis Review

PURPOSE

The lingual-based mucoperiosteal flap, a novel flap, was unclear about the effects on the prognosis of surgery for impacted mandibular third molars. This study aimed to compare the lingual- and buccal-based mucoperiosteal flaps with respect to postoperative responses and complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review with a meta-analysis was designed and the PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases and Google Scholar from January 1, 2000 to April 30, 2020 were searched for randomized clinical trials. The predictor variable was buccal- or lingual-based flap in the surgery, and the outcome variables were pain, swelling, trismus, operative time, and wound dehiscence. Other study variables were sex and retention depth of impacted teeth. RevMan 5.3 software was used for data analysis. Mean differences or standardized mean differences and risk ratios were computed to assess associations between 2 variables, where statistical significance was set at P < .05.

RESULTS

Seven publications met the inclusion criteria, contributing 370 subjects who had 590 teeth removed to sample. The lingual-based flap failed to significantly reduce postoperative discomfort. However, subgroup analysis revealed that subjects who underwent comma flap (a type of lingual-based flap) surgeries complained of milder pain than those who underwent buccal-based flap surgeries on day 1 (mean difference = -1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-1.53, -0.83], P < .001) and day 7 (mean difference = -1.80, 95% CI [-2.13, -1.48], P < .001) after surgery. Significant differences were also observed on days 1, 3, and 7 regarding postoperative swelling and trismus (P < .01). In addition, the lingual-based flap was reported to cause a significantly lower rate of wound dehiscence (relative risk = 0.46, 95% CI [0.30, 0.69], P = .0002).

CONCLUSIONS

The lingual-based flap was associated with better primary wound closure in third molar removal. The comma flap, as a subtype, was preferable for relieving postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus over the buccal-based flap.

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.

Effect of lingual-based flap design on postoperative pain of impacted mandibular third molar surgery: Split-mouth randomized clinical trial

Background

The extraction of third molars is one of the most common procedures in oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. Surgical extraction involves the manipulation of both soft and hard tissues, so the patient usually experiences pain, swelling, and trismus in the immediate post-operative period. Several studies have been conducted using different types of surgical flaps to provide access with the least possible damage of soft tissues. Designing and implementing an optimum flap, which provides easier technique, better visibility, minimal post-operative complications, and best healing, is an aspired goal of every oral surgeon. This study aimed to compare lingual-based four-cornered flap with conventional triangular flap, and to evaluate its effect on post-operative pain after surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars.

Material and Methods

Seventeen patients (age ranged from 19 to 26 years) with bilateral, symmetrical impacted lower third molars (n=34) were included in the study. This was a randomized clinical trial with a split-mouth design. The impacted molars were assigned randomly, by coin flipping, to two groups: Case side with lingual-based four-cornered flap (Group A), and control side with conventional triangular flap (Group B). Away from the incision, the prognosis, surgical intervention, and postoperative procedures were exactly the same for the two groups. Postsurgical pain was assessed for 5 days using visual analogue scale (VAS) and by recording patients need for analgesics on a daily basis. Patients were also evaluated via a self-reporting questionnaire, i.e. Postoperative Symptoms Severity (PoSSe) scale, administered on the seventh postoperative day.

Results

Pain scores recorded in Group A were found to be significantly lower as compared to pain scores in Group B in the 5 postoperative days (P<0.05). Total analgesic intake in Group B was significantly higher (P<0.05). PoSSe scores were lower in Group A, however, this difference was insignificant (P>0.05).

Conclusions

According to the data of the current study and within its limits, it appeared that lingual-based four-cornered flap design was superior to the conventional triangular flap regarding the postsurgical discomfort and pain.

Key words:Impaction, third molar surgery, flap design, pain, PoSSe scale, split-mouth, RCT.

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.

The effect of triangular and reversed triangular flap designs to post third molar odontectomy complications (a pilot study)

Background

Odontectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Flap design influences the post operative complications. Triangular flap is the most widely used flap design but it has many shortages such as dehiscence, alveolar osteitis, reactionary bleeding, and periodontal disruption distal of second molar. The aim of this study is to introduce an alternative flap design in the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars – reversed triangular flap – and to compare this flap design with the triangular flap in case of dehiscence, reactionary bleeding, and clinical attachment loss.

Material and Methods

This prospective, split-mouth study involved 15 patients with bilateral partially impacted mandibular third molars with similar impaction classification. One impacted tooth was removed using a triangular flap and the other using a reversed triangular flap. Post operative complications such as dehiscence, reactionary bleeding, and clinical attachment loss were recorded 1, 3, 7, 14, and 30 days post odontectomy.

Results

Chi square test result shows that there were fewer incidences of dehiscence seven days post surgery using the reversed triangular flap (p=0.032). Mann Whitney-U test result shows that the reversed triangular flap exhibited less bleeding score on day 1 (p=0.002) and day 2 (p=0.035) post surgery. There were no statistically significant differences according to Mann Whitney-U test between the flap designs for the clinical attachment loss on distal of second molar on day 14 (p=0.512) and day 30 (p=0.902) post surgery.

Conclusions

The reversed triangular flap design is preferable to triangular flap for impacted third molar surgery, escpecially in terms of wound dehisence and reactionary bleeding.

Key words:Flap design, third molar impaction, odontectomy, post odontectomy complications.

Simultaneous surgery of mandibular reduction and impacted mandibular third molar extraction: A retrospective study of 65 cases

A considerable number of patients with prominent mandibular angle have mandibular third molar impaction that needs surgical removal. Mandibular reduction is a popular and effective surgery to correct prominent mandibular angle, but it has been rarely performed simultaneously with impacted third molar extraction. In order to decrease the number of operations and suffering of patients, safely performing these 2 operations together is necessary and important. From January 2016 to June 2018, patients received mandibular reduction and impacted mandibular third molar extraction together were retrospectively reviewed. Forty-seven patients receiving long-curve mandibular reduction (n = 12) or simple mandibular reduction (n = 35) were included in this study. A total of 65 impacted mandibular third molars were extracted during mandibular reduction. One patient had hematoma within facial soft tissue which reabsorbed spontaneously. Seven patients who underwent long-curve mandibular reduction reported transient inferior lip numbness for several weeks. No infection or poor wound healing was reported. No immediate or delayed mandibular fracture occurred. All the patients were satisfied with both the aesthetic result of mandibular reduction and the unnecessity of receiving a secondary surgery to extract the impacted third molar. Simultaneously performing mandibular reduction and impacted mandibular third molar extraction can effectively reduce the number of operations and patients' suffering. It is also safe with adequate pre-op assessment, professional surgical knowledge, proper use of surgical instruments, meticulous surgical procedures, and correct post-op care.

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.

Comparison of two different suture knot techniques on postoperative morbidity after impacted mandibular third molar surgery

INTRODUCTION

In third molar surgery, one of the most important factors is how the wound was closed. Tight suturing of the wound commonly gives more discomfort to the many patients in terms of postoperative pain, swelling and trismus. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of two different knot techniques in suturing after extraction of impacted mandibular third molars (IMTM) on quality of life and postoperative complications such as pain, swelling and trismus.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was conducted with a randomized and split-mouth design and included 50 patients over the age of 18 in the ASA I group who had bilateral horizontal impacted mandibular third molars. In all patients, the wounds were closed by simple sutures by applying two different knot techniques as locked (GroupL, n=50) and unlocked (Group UL, n=50) knots. In the postoperative period, pain, swelling, trismus, chewing activity and quality of life were examined.

RESULTS

In the group where the unlocked knotting technique was used, significantly better results were obtained in comparison to the group where the locked knotting technique was used for all values (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

In preventing postoperative complications that are observed after impacted mandibular third molar surgery and affect the quality of life of patients negatively, suturing of the wound by the method of unlocked knotting is a useful technique that may be preferred.

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.

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 Horizontal Mattress Suturing More Effective Than Simple Interrupted Suturing on Postoperative Complications and Primary Wound Healing After Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Surgery?

The aim of this clinical study was to compare the influence of 2 different suturing techniques on postoperative complications and wound healing after surgical extractions of impacted mandibular third molars. In this randomized split mouth study, 30 patients were examined in whom 60 consecutive surgical extractions of symmetrically positioned impacted mandibular third molars were performed. After the extractions, the surgical flaps were sutured with either the simple interrupted or horizontal mattress suturing technique. Postoperative swelling and trismus were recorded on the 2nd, 7th, and 10th days. Pain was recorded in a 7-day diary and wound dehiscence was recorded on the10th postoperative day. Statistical evaluation of data was made using Mann-Whitney U test and Pearson correlation. There were no statistical differences between the 2 suturing techniques in terms of postoperative pain, trismus, and swelling (P > 0.05). There was significantly less wound dehiscence in the horizontal mattress suturing group than in the simple interrupted suturing group (P: 0017). According to the results of this study, the horizontal mattress suturing technique is more effective than the simple interrupted suturing technique on wound healing after impacted mandibular third molar surgery, although it does not decrease the levels of pain, trismus, and swelling.

Lingual Based Four Cornered Flap for Third Molar Surgery

PURPOSE

The aim of this prospective randomized clinical study was to compare the efficacy of lingual based four cornered flap with the commonly used triangular flap for impacted third molar surgery.

METHODS

Ten patients with bilateral impacted third molars were randomly treated under local anaesthesia, one side with triangular flap and single layer closure (with 3-0 silk) and other side by raising lingual based four cornered flap and double layer closure, subcutaneously with 5-0 vicryl and mucosa with 3-0 silk. All patients were operated by single surgeon (A. Rai) and suture removal was done after 7 days.

RESULTS

Healing by primary intension takes place when lingual flap and double layer suturing was done, also the patients had less pain, swelling and alveolar osteitis. The visibility was excellent with lingual flap and pocket formation distal to second molar was also less. The only drawback with lingual flap is that it required little less time in comparison to triangular flap.

CONCLUSION

The lingual based four cornered flap is better than the triangular flap.