Dexamethasone suppresses peripheral prostanoid levels without analgesia in a clinical model of acute inflammation

Comparison of the effects of submucosal hyaluronidase and dexamethasone on postoperative edema, pain, trismus, and infection following impacted third molar surgery

BACKGROUND

Limiting postoperative edema, pain, trismus, and infection is crucial for smooth healing. This prospective, controlled clinical trial investigated and compared the effectiveness of dexamethasone and hyaluronidase in relieving these complications.

METHODS

In groups Ia and IIa, 8 mg of dexamethasone and 150 IU of hyaluronidase were administered following the removal of impacted teeth, respectively. The contralateral sides (groups Ib and IIb) were determined as control groups. Edema, pain, trismus, and infection were clinically evaluated on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 7th postoperative days.

RESULTS

60 patients were enrolled in the study. Hyaluronidase provided significantly more edema relief than dexamethasone on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 7th postoperative days (P = 0.031, 0.002, 0.000, and 0.009, respectively). No statistical difference was found between dexamethasone and hyaluronidase in VAS and rescue analgesic intake amount values for all time points. Hyaluronidase was more effective in reducing trismus than dexamethasone on the 2nd and 3rd postoperative days (P = 0.029, 0.024, respectively). Neither of the agents significantly increased the postoperative infection rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Hyaluronidase can be selected when postoperative excessive edema and trismus are anticipated. Dexamethasone may be a cost-effective option if postoperative pain control is merely targeted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered in the Clinical Trials Protocol Registration and Results System (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number: NCT05466604) on 20/07/2022.

Solid Lipid Nanoparticles Loaded with Dexamethasone Palmitate for Pulmonary Inflammation Treatment by Nebulization Approach

Pneumonia stands as the leading infectious cause of childhood mortality annually, underscoring its significant impact on pediatric health. Although dexamethasone (DXMS) is effective for treating pulmonary inflammation, its therapeutic potential is compromised by systemic side effects and suboptimal carrier systems. To address this issue, the current study introduces solid lipid nanoparticles encapsulating hydrophobic dexamethasone palmitate (DXMS-Pal-SLNs) as an anti-inflammatory nanoplatform to treat pneumonia. The specialized nanoparticle formulation is characterized by high drug loading efficiency, low drug leakage and excellent colloidal stability in particular during nebulization and is proficiently designed to target alveolar macrophages in deep lung regions via local delivery with the nebulization administration. In vitro analyses revealed substantial reductions in the secretions of tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-6 from alveolar macrophages, highlighting the potential efficacy of DXMS-Pal-SLNs in alleviating pneumonia-related inflammation. Similarly, in vivo experiments showed a significant reduction in the levels of these cytokines in the lungs of mice experiencing lipopolysaccharide-induced pulmonary inflammation after the administration of DXMS-Pal-SLNs via nebulization. Furthermore, the study demonstrated that DXMS-Pal-SLNs effectively control acute infections without causing pulmonary infiltration or excessive recruitment of immunocytes in lung tissues. These findings highlight the potential of nebulized DXMS-Pal-SLNs as a promising therapeutic strategy for mitigating pneumonia-related inflammations.

Effect of submucosal administration of dexamethasone on postoperative discomfort after third molar surgery

Aim

To compare the impact of submucosal dexamethasone (4 mg) administered after the onset of local anesthesia on postoperative discomfort after third molar surgery and compare the parameters with a control group that did not receive the drug.

Methods

A total of 60 patients indicated for surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars (mesioangular, Class II or III, and position B or C) were randomly divided into two groups of 30 patients each. After the onset of local anesthesia, the first group (Group A) received a submucosal injection of 4 mg dexamethasone adjacent to the surgical site, and the control group (Group B) received no drug. Pain, swelling, and trismus were recorded at follow-up visits on the 1st, 2nd, and 7th postoperative days. Assessment of postoperative discomfort was performed by evaluating responses through a modified postoperative symptom severity scale questionnaire, which was administered to the patients on the 7th postoperative day.

Results

The difference in subjective pain values and the mean number of analgesics consumed was not significant between the groups. The difference in postoperative swelling was statistically significant on the 1st, 2nd (P < 0.0001), and 7th postoperative days (P = 0.0152). The difference in postoperative trismus was highly significant on 1st and 2nd postoperative days (P < 0.0001). The difference in the mean total quality of life (QOL) score, Eating, Appearance, Daily activity subscale (P < 0.0001), and Social Isolation subscale (P = 0.0002) was statistically significant between both groups.

Conclusion

It was found that the administration of submucosal dexamethasone resulted in significantly lesser postoperative swelling and trismus and better QOL outcomes.

A novel therapeutic approach for reducing postoperative inflammatory complications after impacted mandibular third molar removal

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to compare effect of combined use of dexamethasone and honey versus each agent alone in controlling complications associated with removal of impacted mandibular third molar.

METHODS

This randomized clinical study included patients suffering from impacted mandibular wisdom teeth. Patients were divided randomly into 4 groups. Group I, control, group II, received dexamethasone injection preoperatively, group III, received honey locally in the wound after extraction, and group IV, received dexamethasone injection preoperatively and topical honey application. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively to assess facial edema, interincisal distance, pain, and total analgesic dose used.

RESULTS

Significant edema developed in group I than other groups and improved significantly in group II and III on seventh postoperative day, and tenth postoperative day in group I. Insignificant edema developed in group IV. Significant decrease in interincisal distance occurred in all groups on third postoperative day that improved significantly on seventh postoperative days in all groups except group I, it improved on tenth postoperative day. Pain was significantly minimum in group IV than other groups and its maximum degree was in group I.

CONCLUSION

Both dexamethasone and honey are an effective way of minimizing swelling, pain, and trismus after removal of impacted lower third molars. Both agents either alone or in combination provide simple, safe, painless, and cost-effective method to eliminate postoperative discomfort. However, dexamethasone or honey can decrease complications related to surgical extraction of mandibular third molar, the simultaneous application of both agents is more effective method in this regard.

Prolonged PGE2 treatment increased TTX-sensitive but not TTX-resistant sodium current in trigeminal ganglionic neurons

Prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂) is an important inflammatory mediator for the initiation and maintenance of inflammatory and neuropathic pain. The acute effect of PGE₂ on sodium currents has been widely characterized in sensory neurons; however, the prolonged effect of PGE₂ remains to be determined. Here, we performed patch clamp recordings to evaluate the acute and prolonged effects of PGE₂ on sodium currents in trigeminal ganglionic (TG) neurons from male Sprague-Dawley rats. We found that 24-h treatment with PGE₂ (10 μM) increased the peak sodium current density by approximately 31% in a voltage-dependent manner and shifted the activation curve in a hyperpolarized direction but did not affect steady-state inactivation. Furthermore, treatment with PGE₂ for 24 h increased the current density of tetrodotoxin-sensitive (TTX-S) but not TTX-resistant (TTX-R) channels significantly. Interestingly, TTX-S current was increased mostly in medium-sized, but not in small-sized, neurons after 24 h of treatment with PGE₂. Moreover, the mRNA level of TTX-S Nav1.1 but not TTX-R Nav1.8 or Nav1.9 was significantly increased after 24 h of treatment with PGE_2. In contrast, 5-min treatment with PGE₂ (10 μM) increased the peak sodium current density by approximately 29% and increased TTX-R sodium currents, but not TTX-S currents, in both small- and medium-sized TG neurons. Our results presented a differential regulation of subtypes of sodium channels by acute and prolonged treatments of PGE₂, which may help to better understand the mechanism of PGE₂-mediated orofacial pain development.

Evaluation of effect of submucosal administration of depomedrol in management of postoperative sequelae in mandibular fractures: A randomized clinical trial study

Introduction:

The mandible is a commonly fractured bone in the face, a fact related to its prominent and exposed position. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of mandibular fractures has been associated with trauma to the surgical site and the surrounding tissues.

Purpose:

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of immediate postoperative submucosal depomedrol administration on postoperative pain, edema, and trismus after ORIF for mandibular fractures.

Materials and Methods:

We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study of forty patients who required ORIF for mandibular fractures under general anesthesia. The patients were divided into two groups, an experimental group who received immediate postoperative submucosal 40 mg of depomedrol injection through the surgical incision site, and a control group who did not receive any drug. Pain was assessed using a Visual Analog Scale score and the frequency of analgesic consumption at various postoperative intervals. The maximum interincisal distance and facial measurements were compared before surgery and at 24, 48, 72 h, and 7 days after surgery.

Results:

Statistical analysis of the data indicated a significant decrease in edema, trismus, and pain in the depomedrol group. No clinically apparent infection, disturbance of wound healing, or other corticosteroid-related complications were noted.

Conclusion:

The results of our study suggest that submucosal administration of depomedrol injection after ORIF for mandibular fractures is effective in reducing postoperative pain, edema, and trismus.

A triple-blind randomized clinical trial of different associations between dexamethasone and non-steroids anti-inflammatories for preemptive action in third molar extractions

The aim of this study is to evaluate the preemptive analgesic effects of dexamethasone (DEX) alone or combined with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in third molar surgeries. The subjects were divided into five groups (n = 20 teeth/group); subjects received only 8 mg of dexamethasone 1 h before the surgical procedure (DEX group), or in combination with etodolac (DEX + ETO), ketorolac (DEX + KET), ibuprofen (DEX + IBU), loxoprofen (DEX + LOX). Paracetamol 750 mg was provided as the number of rescue analgesics (NRA). Salivary PGE2 expression was measured preoperatively and at 48 h. Edema and Maximum mouth opening (MMO) were measured postoperatively at 48 h and 7 days. A visual analog scale (VAS) was performed postoperatively at 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 h, and 7 days. Salivary expression of PGE2 showed a decrease only for the DEX group. Edema and MMO and NRA consumption showed no significant differences among the groups (P > 0.05). The VAS showed a significantly lower pain perception at 6 h after the surgery for the DEX + ETO and DEX + KET groups (P < 0.05). The combination of DEX and NSAIDS should be considered for preemptive acute postsurgical pain management in third molar surgery. In some drug associations such as dexamethasone 8 mg + NSAIDS (ETO and KET) in the pre-operative time, only a few rescue analgesics are necessary.

Effect of Perioperative Systemic Dexamethasone on Pain, Edema, and Trismus in Mandibular Fracture Surgery: A Randomized Trial

ABSTRACT

The authors' aim was to evaluate the effect of perioperative systemic dexamethasone (DXM) administration on postoperative pain, edema, and trismus in mandibular fracture patients. The authors conducted a prospective randomized study of 45 patients with one or 2 noncomminuted fractures of the dentate part of the mandible. All patients underwent surgery for intraoral miniplate fixation. Patients in the study group were given a total of 30 mg DXM, while patients in the control group received neither DXM nor placebo. Only paracetamol and opioids were served as analgesics. Pain severity was assessed using the visual analog scale. The effect in facial swelling was measured in centimeters and analyzed as percentage change. Trismus was evaluated as the difference in maximal mouth opening by measuring interincisal distance in millimeters. The Mann-Whitney U test was applied to determine the statistical significance of differences between the groups. Thirty-four patients were included in the statistical analysis. The visual analog scale score was significantly lower in the study group than in the control group at 18 hours postoperatively (P = 0.033). Significant differences in edema or trismus were not found postoperatively between the DXM and control groups. In conclusion, perioperative DXM decreases postoperative pain in mandibular fracture patients when nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are not used, but it does not seem to be effective in reducing edema or trismus.

Comparative Study between the Combination of Dexamethasone and Bupivacaine for Third Molar Surgery Postoperative Pain: A Triple-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

Objectives: To compare the possible benefits of the combination of dexamethasone–bupivacaine with articaine–epinephrine as an anaesthetic block after third molar surgery. Materials and Methods: Triple-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel, phase 3 clinical trial. Two groups: experimental (93 patients) with standard anaesthetic block: 40/0.005 mg/mL articaine–epinephrine and submucosal reinforcement with 0.8 mg dexamethasone–5% bupivacaine; and control group (91 patients) with standard block: 40/0.005 mg/mL articaine–epinephrine. The surgery consisted of the extraction of the impacted mandibular third molar by performing a procedure following the same repeatable scheme. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to analyse postoperative pain. Results: Groups were homogeneous, without significant differences related to epidemiological variables. Postoperative pain among the first, second, and seventh postoperative days was statistically significantly lower in the experimental group compared to the control group (p < 0.001). Drug consumption was lower in the experimental group throughout the study period (p < 0.04). Conclusion: Bupivacaine is an alternative to articaine in oral surgery, being more effective in reducing postoperative pain by reducing patients’ scores on the VAS as well as their consumption of analgesic drugs after surgery.

Pain in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Implant Dentistry: Types and Management

Over the years, the pain has been defined numerous times in several ways. In oral and maxillofacial surgery, the occurrence of pain, especially postoperatively, is anticipated. Pain arises as a combination of various processes after tissue damage. Distinct pain experiences in oral surgery were depicted in several previous studies, adding knowledge to the field. The management of these encounters has been suggested over time, improving treatment approaches in the clinical setting. This review aims to understand the pain and its types and intervention in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

Asymmetric Synthesis and Biological Screening of Quinoxaline-Containing Synthetic Lipoxin A4 Mimetics (QNX-sLXms)

Failure to resolve inflammation underlies many prevalent pathologies. Recent insights have identified lipid mediators, typified by lipoxins (LXs), as drivers of inflammation resolution, suggesting potential therapeutic benefit. We report the asymmetric preparation of novel quinoxaline-containing synthetic-LXA₄-mimetics (QNX-sLXms). Eight novel compounds were screened for their impact on inflammatory responses. Structure–activity relationship (SAR) studies showed that (R)-6 (also referred to as AT-02-CT) was the most efficacious and potent anti-inflammatory compound of those tested. (R)-6 significantly attenuated lipopolysaccharide (LPS)- and tumor-necrosis-factor-α (TNF-α)-induced NF-κB activity in monocytes and vascular smooth muscle cells. The molecular target of (R)-6 was investigated. (R)-6 activated the endogenous LX receptor formyl peptide receptor 2 (ALX/FPR2). The anti-inflammatory properties of (R)-6 were further investigated in vivo in murine models of acute inflammation. Consistent with in vitro observations, (R)-6 attenuated inflammatory responses. These results support the therapeutic potential of the lead QNX-sLXm (R)-6 in the context of novel inflammatory regulators.

Is Dexamethasone superior to Ketorolac in reducing pain, swelling and trismus following mandibular third molar removal? A split mouth triple-blind randomized clinical trial

Background

The preemptive use of anti-inflammatory drugs, such as corticosteroids and NSAIDs, has the potential to reduce pain, swelling and trismus following oral surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of dexamethasone and ketorolac tromethamine in reducing pain, swelling and trismus after mandibular third molar removal.

Material and Methods

The researches implemented a triple-blind, randomized clinical trial. The study was conducted with ASA I individuals aging between 18 and 35 years, which were randomized and submitted to two interventions, one with 8mg dexamethasone and the other with 20mg ketorolac tromethamine given 1h before the procedure. The primary predictor variable was the use of dexamethasone or ketorolac. The primary outcome variable was the postoperative pain level, measured with a Visual Analogue Scale. The secondary outcome variables were the amount of rescue analgesic consumed, swelling and trismus. Repeated-measures ANOVA and t-test for paired samples were used to compare the means. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Fifty individuals were randomized and allocated to intervention, and the sample was composed of 40 subjects who completed the study (27 female and 13 male). Dexamethasone, when compared to ketorolac tromethamine, showed a significantly higher reduction in pain level at 8h, 16h, 24h, 32h, 40h and 72h, in swelling and trismus at 24h, 48h, 72h and 7 days and in total number of rescue analgesics taken up to 72h postoperative (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The clinical performance of dexamethasone in controlling pain, swelling and trismus after mandibular third molar removal was superior to ketorolac tromethamine’s.

Key words:Third Molar, anti-inflammatory agents, dexamethasone, ketorolac.

Analgesics for Dental Implants: A Systematic Review

Postsurgical pain is commonly associated with dental and oral surgery, and the use of analgesics has been investigated in the management of postoperative pain. This systematic review summarizes available evidence on analgesics used to manage dental implant surgery postoperative pain, to identify best therapeutic protocols and knowledge gap. A comprehensive search was conducted including MEDLINE/Pubmed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, clinicaltrials.gov, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews through May 2020. Only randomized controlled trials were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed, and risk of bias was appraised using Cochrane RoB2 tool. Eleven trials (762 patients overall) were included. Some aspects limited the feasibility of a meaningful meta-analysis; thus, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Risk of bias was low in four studies and high in two studies, while five studies raised some concerns due to the randomization process. Analgesic use seemed to be associated with improved postoperative outcomes (pain, patient's satisfaction, and need for rescue medication) when compared to placebo. Overall, this review suggests that the administration of analgesics may provide some advantages in the management of postoperative outcomes after dental implant placement, while indications about the best analgesics cannot be provided.

The Impact of Prior Use of Corticosteroid to Dental Extraction on Oral Health-Related Quality-of-Life and Clinical Outcomes: A Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of prior use of corticosteroids before dental extractions on oral health-related quality-of-life (OHRQoL).

METHODS

A randomized and triple-blind (patient, surgeon, and examiner) clinical trial was designed. The individuals were randomly allocated to 2 groups: test and placebo. In the test group, 2 capsules of 4 mg dexamethasone were administered orally. In the placebo group, subjects received 2 capsules with the same characteristics. In both groups, the administration took place 1 hour before the procedure. OHRQoL was assessed by the Brazilian version of Oral Health Impact Profile 14 (OHIP-14). The OHIP-14 questionnaire and the assessment methods for clinical parameters were collected preoperatively and postoperatively. Multilevel linear regression models fitted the associations between preoperative use of corticosteroids and overall and domain-specific OHIP-14 scores over time.

RESULTS

One hundred fourteen patients were selected for the study; however, 21 were excluded for not returning to postoperative control on the seventh day, resulting in 93 patients assessed (test = 44 and placebo = 49). The pain had a negative impact on OHRQoL (P < .01); however, the use of the drug had no statistically significant influence on OHRQoL (P = .62) and the clinical outcomes of pain (P = .63), mouth aperture (P = .05), and edema (P = .69).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the 8 mg dexamethasone administered orally before the procedure was not effective on the improvement of the quality-of-life of patients undergoing dental extraction. However, using the medication seems to result in an improvement in the postoperative period of patients who had impacted teeth. Further research involving the analysis of OHRQoL must be performed, and other dosages and means of administration must be tested.

Combination of etodolac and dexamethasone improves preemptive analgesia in third molar surgery: a randomized study

OBJECTIVE

This randomized, controlled, triple-blind, crossover clinical trial aimed to investigate the use of dexamethasone (DEX) and etodolac (ETO) as preemptive analgesia before mandibular third molar extraction.

METHODS

Patients were divided into three groups (n = 20 teeth each) based on the drug administered: DEX 8 mg (DEX); DEX 8 mg plus ETO 300 mg (DEX + ETO), and ETO 300 mg (ETO). Paracetamol (750 mg) tablets were administered as rescue analgesics. Pain was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h and 7 days postoperatively. Edema and trismus were assessed 48 and 72 h postoperatively. All data were subjected to statistical analysis, where a P value < .05 indicated statistical significance.

RESULTS

VAS scores and the number of rescue analgesics taken were lower in the DEX + ETO group than in the other groups (P < .001 and P = .014, respectively). At 48 h, trismus was similar among all groups; however, the ETO group showed the highest trismus 7 days postoperatively (P < .05). Edema was similar among all groups at all time points (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

The combined use of the anti-inflammatory drugs, DEX and ETO, resulted in better pain control and the need for fewer rescue analgesics than the use of either drug alone, which indicated their effectiveness in mandibular third molar extractions preoperatively.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This drug combination can lead to less pain, edema, and trismus and reduce the use of rescue analgesics in the postoperative period.

Efficacy of Various Routes of Dexamethasone Administration in Reducing Postoperative Sequelae Following Impacted Third Molar Surgery

Aim:

To compare the efficacy of intravenous (IV), intramassetric (IM) submucosal (SM) routes & oral routes of dexamethasone administration post impacted third molar removal surgery.

Type of Study:

Prospective randomized comparative clinical study.

Materials and Method:

This prospective comparative study included 60 patients with Class II and position B type of impaction (according to Pell and Gregory's classification). Patients were randomly divided into 4 groups. Group A, B, C & D patients received 8mg dexamethasone immediately post-surgical tooth removal via the IV, SM and IM route & oral respectively. Assessment of swelling, mouth opening and pain was done at intervals of 1st, 3rd and 7th post-op days.

Results:

The average age of the patients was 27 years. The mean time taken was 20 mins 40 seconds. The IV group showed minimal swelling and better pain control on the 3rd post op day (statistically significant). All 4 routes showed comparable mouth opening results.

Conclusion:

IV administration of dexamethasone post third molar surgery has been the traditional way because of its faster onset of action and increased efficacy; IM and SM routes are also comparably effective although oral route had the best patient acceptance.

Postoperative pain, edema and trismus following third molar surgery - A comparitive study between submucosal and intravenous dexamethasone

BACKGROUND

Third molar surgey always needs primary intervention as it can lead to various complications and pathologies. Considering other ways for postoperative anesthesia it was infered that submucosal group which showed simple injection technique and direct surgical site administration is more beneficial. It was noticed as a patient comfort method which can be the preferred as the drug of choice over intravenous route of dexamethasone injection.

INTRODUCTION

Impaction of third molar is a common affliction and surgical removal is the only treatment option. The post-operative sequelae following the third molar surgery are pain, edema and trismus. The use of corticosteroids is to counteract it via various routes. Still, controversy exists in the literature regarding the administration of corticosteroids over the routes and time of administration. The purpose of this study was to compare the postoperative pain, edema and trismus following third molar surgery while using preoperative intravenous and submucosal routes of dexamethasone, in terms of pain, facial swelling, and trismus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study consisted of 64 patients presented with mesioangular impacted mandibular third molar for surgical removal. Preoperative measurements of edema, trismus were analyzed. Postoperative pain was estimated using visual analogue scale. Edema was assessed by the extra oral facial measurements. Trismus was measured by recording the interincisal opening in millimeters. Dexamethasone was administered intravenously or submucosally according to the choice of operating surgeon and were divided into 2 groups.

RESULTS

Mean and standard deviation calculated for continuous variables. Changes in parameters was analysed using t test and Mann-Whitney U test. Here, submucosal group were reported with increased pain on the second postoperative day. On seventh postoperative day mean value turns to 0.7 ± 1 for submucosal and 0.6 ± 1.2 for intravenous group. On overall observation, intravenous group expressed statistically significant (P < 0.01) reduction in pain compared to the submucosal group during immediate and second postoperative days.

CONCLUSION

Analyzing the previous studies, and from the experience of the present one, it could be reasonably found out that administration of submucosal dexamethasone is beneficial for overall patient compliance.

Comparative evaluation of efficacy and latency of twin mix vs 2% lignocaine HCL with 1:80000 epinephrine in surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar

Introduction

A prospective randomized double-blind controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the latency and duration of pterygomandibular nerve block with a mixture of 1.8 ml 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine and 1 ml of 4 mg dexamethasone and its impact on postoperative sequelae after surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars.

Materials and Methods

This study was conducted in 40 subjects referred to the department of oral and maxillofacial surgery; they were divided into 20 subjects each in group A and B with the age range of 18-72 years planned for elective surgical removal of unilateral impacted mandibular third molar. Each patient was randomly selected to receive anesthesia using 1.8 ml 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine in group A or 2.8 ml twin mix (1.8 ml 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine + 1 ml 4 mg dexamethasone) in group B. After injection of the anesthetic solution, the time to anesthetic effect, duration of anesthesia from initial patient perception of the anesthetic effect to the time when the effect subsides, need to reanesthetize the surgical site were recorded, and 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) was used to subjectively assess the overall pain intensity while injecting the study drug, during surgery, and in the postoperative period.

Results

Mean VAS value for pain on local anesthetic injection was less in twin-mix group. The time of onset of the local anesthetic was significantly less for the study group T, 51.35 ± 7.15 s when compared with patients in study group C (P less than 0.0001). The duration of soft tissue anesthesia was longer for all the patients in the study group T. On comparative evaluation between study group C and study group T, patients in the control group had more severe swelling and reduction in mouth opening in the postoperative period.

Conclusion

The addition of dexamethasone to lignocaine and its administration as an intraspace injection significantly shortens the latency and prolongs the duration of the soft tissue anesthesia, with improved quality of life in the postoperative period after surgical extraction of mandibular third molars.

Anesthetic efficacies of intrapapillary injection in comparison to inferior alveolar nerve block for mandibular premolar extraction: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Intrapapillary injection (IPI) has been suggested to improve pulpal anesthesia of mandibular teeth and to avoid complications from inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB). This study aimed to determine and compare clinical efficacies and prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂) levels between IPI and IANB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

IANB was randomly selected for mandibular premolar anesthesia on one side of 40 patients, whereas IPI was locally administered to the contralateral premolar. Pulpal anesthesia, pain during injection and extraction, patients' satisfaction, and complications were assessed from 30 patients. Gingival crevicular fluid from ten patients was collected for PGE₂ quantification by ELISA.

RESULTS

Of 30 patients, 18 preferred IPI after injection due to significantly faster mean onset of pulpal anesthesia (p < 0.001) and lower mean score of injection pain (p = 0.017) than IANB, but 21 preferred IANB instead after extraction due to less postoperative pain, consistent with the significantly lower median PGE₂ level on the IANB side than that on the IPI at 30 min (p = 0.047). However, there was no difference in the mean satisfaction score between the two techniques. Ulcerated epithelium and sloughing tissues were found at the IPI site in some patients with complete healing within 2 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The anesthetic efficacies of IPI for mandibular premolar extraction are comparable to those of IANB. However, postoperative pain and local complications at the IPI site should be considered.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

IPI may be used for dental procedures that require only a short anesthetic duration to avoid failure of pulpal anesthesia, complications, and discomfort from IANB.

Comparison of Two Routes of Administration of Dexamethasone to Reduce the Postoperative Sequelae After Third Molar Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical efficacy of two routes of dexamethasone administration in reducing the postoperative sequelae after third molar extraction. Electronic databases (PUBMED, SCOPUS and EBSCO library) were screened in order to find both randomized and non-randomized clinical trials that directly compare the submucosal intraoral or the intramuscular extraoral administration of dexamethasone. No restriction about year of publication was imposed. About 340 titles and abstracts were screened independently by two authors. Of these [340 titles], only 4 randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. No statistical differences in postoperative pain, swelling and trismus were recorded comparing the intraoral submucosal and the extraoral intramuscular injection of dexamethasone in an extra-oral site.

Effect of Oral Administration of Bromelain on Postoperative Discomfort After Third Molar Surgery

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this prospective randomized controlled clinical trial was to evaluate the effect of oral administration of bromelain on discomfort after mandibular third molar surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-four consecutive patients requiring surgical removal of a single mandibular impacted third molar under local anesthesia were randomly assigned to receiving no drug (control group, Group A), postoperative 40 mg bromelain every 6 hours for 6 days (Group B), preoperative 4 mg dexamethasone sodium phosphate as a submucosal injection (Group C), and preoperative 4 mg dexamethasone sodium phosphate as a submucosal injection plus postoperative 40 mg bromelain every 6 hours for 6 days (Group D). Standardized surgical and analgesic protocols were adopted. Maximum interincisal distance and facial contours were measured at baseline and on postoperative days 2 and 7. Pain was measured objectively by counting the number of analgesic tablets required. Patient perception of the severity of symptoms was assessed with a follow-up questionnaire (PoSSe scale).

RESULTS

On postoperative day 2, there was a statistically significant reduction in facial edema in both Groups C and D compared with the control group, but no statistically significant differences were observed between Group B and the control group. At evaluation on postoperative day 7, Group D showed a statistically significant reduction in postoperative swelling compared with the control group. The combined use of bromelain and dexamethasone (Group D) induced a statistically significant reduction in the total number of analgesic tablets taken after surgery compared with the control group. The treatment groups had a limited, nonsignificant effect on trismus when compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Bromelain used singly showed moderate anti-inflammatory efficacy, reducing postoperative swelling, albeit not to any significant extent compared with no drug administration. The combined use of bromelain and dexamethasone sodium phosphate yielded the best results in terms of control of postoperative discomfort.

A comparison of early and late treatments on allodynia and its chronification in experimental neuropathic pain

Background Surgeries causing nerve injury can result in chronic neuropathic pain, which is clinically managed by using antidepressant or anticonvulsant drugs. Currently, there is a growing interest for investigating preemptive treatments that would prevent this long-term development of neuropathic pain. Our aim was to compare analgesic drugs using two distinct treatment modalities: either treatment onset at surgery time or following a couple of weeks of neuropathic pain. Methods In male C57BL/6J mice, neuropathic pain was induced by cuffing the sciatic nerve, and allodynia was assessed using von Frey filaments. We tested the effect of anticonvulsants (gabapentin 10 mg/kg and carbamazepine 40 mg/kg), antidepressants (desipramine 5 mg/kg, duloxetine 10 mg/kg, and fluoxetine 10 mg/kg), dexamethasone (2 mg/kg), and ketamine (15 mg/kg). Drugs were injected daily or twice a day, starting either at surgery time or on day 25 postsurgery (15 days of treatment for antidepressants and 10 days for other drugs). Results Ketamine was the only effective treatment during the early postsurgical period. Although early anticonvulsant treatment was not immediately effective, it prevented chronification of allodynia. When treatments started at day 25 postsurgery, desipramine, duloxetine, and anticonvulsants suppressed the mechanical allodynia. Conclusions Our data show that allodynia measured in experimental neuropathic pain model likely results from a combination of different processes (early vs. late allodynia) that display different sensitivity to treatments. We also propose that early anticonvulsant treatment with gabapentin or carbamazepine may have a prophylactic effect on the chronification of allodynia following nerve injury.

Oral dexamethasone decreases postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus more than diclofenac following third molar removal: a randomized controlled clinical trial

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the anti-inflammatory potential of two pharmacotherapy protocols based on the parameters of pain, trismus, and swelling, after extraction of third molars.

METHODS

Thirty patients selected with symmetrical impaction of third molars were submitted to surgical procedures in both sides in different times. For one group, dexamethasone was used for 3 days, and for another group diclofenac sodium was also used for the same period. The main variables analyzed were the visual analogue pain scale (VAS), but others were also analyzed such as swelling and trismus, which were submitted to statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The results had no difference regarding the length of procedures (p = 0.986) and the pain in the immediate and 4-h postoperative period (p = 0.723 and 0.541). The rescue analgesic consumption was higher (p < 0.05) when using the protocol with diclofenac sodium. The variables mouth opening (p < 0.05) and swelling (p < 0.05) were significantly better when using the protocol with dexamethasone in the postoperative period.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical protocol with the use of dexamethasone in the postoperative period was more effective in controlling pain, trismus, and swelling, after the extraction of third molars, when compared to diclofenac sodium.

Comparative Assessment of Preoperative versus Postoperative Dexamethasone on Postoperative Complications following Lower Third Molar Surgical Extraction

Aim. To evaluate the effect of preoperative versus postoperative administration of oral Dexamethasone on postoperative complications including pain, edema, and trismus following lower third molar surgery. Methods. 24 patients were divided into two equal groups receiving 8 mg Dexamethasone orally, one group one hour preoperatively and the other group immediately after surgery. Pain was measured using VAS, edema was measured using a graduated tape between 4 fixed points in the face, and the mouth opening was measured using a graduated sliding caliper. Results. In this study pain and trismus records were similar and statistically nonsignificant in both groups. The results had proven that preoperative administration was superior when compared to postoperative administration regarding edema (0.002). Conclusions. Preoperative oral administration of 8 mg Dexamethasone was superior to the postoperative administration of the same dose concerning edema after lower third molar surgery.

Dexamethasone injection into the pterygomandibular space in lower third molar surgery

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of 8mg dexamethasone injection into the pterygomandibular space on the postoperative sequelae of lower third molar surgery. A prospective, randomized, controlled, split-mouth study was designed involving 62 lower third molar extractions (31 patients). Prior to surgery, the study group received 2ml of 4mg/ml (8mg) dexamethasone injection through the pterygomandibular space following local anaesthesia; the control group received 2ml normal saline injection. Facial swelling, mouth opening, pain on a visual analogue scale (VAS), and the number of analgesics consumed were assessed. Descriptive statistics and the independent-samples t-test were used to compare the two groups at P<0.05. There was a significant reduction in swelling on day 2 postoperative in the dexamethasone group. Mouth opening was also significantly greater on day 2 in the dexamethasone group. The VAS pain score was significantly lower on the day of the operation and first postoperative day in the dexamethasone group, but did not differ significantly between the groups on the other postoperative days. The injection of 8mg dexamethasone into the pterygomandibular space was effective in reducing postoperative swelling, limited mouth opening, and pain following impacted lower third molar extraction.

Comparison Between Dexamethasone and Ibuprofen for Postoperative Pain Prevention and Control After Surgical Implant Placement: A Double-Masked, Parallel-Group, Placebo-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain is a potential adverse side effect of oral surgeries, and attempts should be made to prevent or minimize it. This study compares efficacy of preemptive ibuprofen and dexamethasone protocols for pain prevention or control after surgical implant placement.

METHODS

This prospective, double-masked, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial included 117 patients with planned dental implant placement. Patients were assigned to receive one of three different protocols: 1) 600 mg ibuprofen 1 hour before surgery and another 600 mg 6 hours after the first dose; 2) 4 mg dexamethasone 1 hour before surgery and another 4 mg 6 hours after the first dose; or 3) placebo. Rescue medication (1,000 mg acetaminophen) was made available to each patient, and they were instructed to take it as necessary. Pain intensity was evaluated via a 101-point numeric rating scale and a visual analog scale, and discomfort was evaluated using a four-point verbal rating scale hourly for the first 8 hours after surgery and three times daily for the following 3 days.

RESULTS

Ibuprofen and dexamethasone significantly reduced pain (Kruskal-Wallis; P <0.05) up to 3 days after surgery and discomfort (P <0.05) up to 2 days after surgery compared with placebo treatment. Both treatments reduced the number of painkillers taken and increased time before the first painkiller was taken (P <0.01).

CONCLUSION

Steroidal dexamethasone is as effective as non-steroidal ibuprofen for preventing or controlling postoperative pain and discomfort after surgical implant placement.

The efficacy of dexamethasone injection on postoperative pain in lower third molar surgery

Background

Surgery on the lower impacted third molar usually involves trauma in the highly vascularized loose connective tissue area, leading to inflammatory sequelae including postoperative pain, swelling, and general oral dysfunction during the immediate post-operative phase. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of preoperative injection of a single dose of 8 mg dexamethasone for postoperative pain control in lower third molar surgery.

Methods

A controlled, randomized, split-mouth, prospective study involving lower third molar surgery was performed in 31 patients. The randomized sampling group was preoperatively injected, after local anesthesia, with a single dose of dexamethasone (8 mg in 2 ml) through the pterygomandibular space; 2 ml of normal saline (with no dexamethasone) was injected as a placebo.

Results

The pain VAS score was significantly different on the day of the operation compared to the first post-operative day (P = 0.00 and 0.01, respectively), but it was not significantly different on the third and seventh postoperative day between the control and study groups. There was a significant reduction in swelling on the second postoperative day, and a difference between the second postoperative day and baseline value in the study group (P < 0.05). Trismus was highly significantly different on the second postoperative day and between baseline and second postoperative day between the groups (P = 0.04 and 0.02, respectively). Descriptive statistics and independent-samples t- test were used to assess the significance of differences.

Conclusions

Injection of 8 mg dexamethasone into the pterygomandibular space effectively reduced the postoperative pain and other postoperative sequalae.

The Efficacy of Four Ways of Administrating Dexamethasone during Surgical Extraction of Partially Impacted Lower Third Molars

Glucocorticoids are drugs noted for their potent anti-inflammatory effect and long lasting half-life. Various studies have been carried out to identify which of these molecules is best for reducing the post-operative sequelae after surgical extraction of the impacted lower third molar. This study examines four different ways of administering dexamethasone after surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars: endoalveolar application, submucous injection, intravenous administration and intramuscular injection, with the aim of identifying which method gives the least discomfort to the patient in regard to reduction of pain, edema and post-operative lock-jaw. Results show that a greater reduction of the post-operative sequelae was obtained in the group of patients treated with dexamethasone intravenously. Satisfying results were also obtained in the group treated with a topical administration of dexamethasone in powder form and in the group which was given dexamethasone through an intramuscular injection. These last two groups had similar results. Instead, the results obtained in the group that received dexamethasone through local submucous injection were not satisfactory.

Comparison of the anti-inflammatory effect of dexamethasone and ketorolac in the extractions of third molars

This double-blind, split-mouth, and randomized study was aimed to compare the efficacy of dexamethasone and ketorolac tromethamine, through the evaluation of pain, edema, and limitation of mouth opening. Thirty-four individuals aged 18-26 years, having bilateral mandibular third molars, in a similar position, were selected. Two different surgical procedures were performed on the same individual by the single surgeon. For an extraction, the individual received 1 capsule of 10 mg ketorolac tromethamine 1 h before surgery and every 8 h for 2 days. For the extraction of the contralateral side, the individual received 1 capsule of 8 mg dexamethasone 1 h before surgery and 1 placebo capsule every 8 h for 2 days. Sodium metamizol, 500 mg, was given as rescue medication in postoperative. Pain was assessed by the Visual Box Scale-11 points (BS-11) at 24 h postoperative. Edema (metric measurement) and the maximum mouth opening (interincisal) were recorded in the pre-operative, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h and 7 days postoperatively. The results showed that both therapeutic treatments used were effective in the postoperative, and there were no statistically significant differences between the groups for the pain and edema variables. However, for the limitation of mouth opening, 24 h and 7 days postoperatively, the dexamethasone group had a lower limitation of mouth opening, behaving better than the ketorolac for this variable in these periods. Due also to the higher margin of safety, the use of dexamethasone as a single dose becomes a more suitable alternative for use in routine surgical extractions of third molars.

Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Oral Dexamethasone and Intramuscular Dexamethasone in Mandibular Third Molar Surgeries

INTRODUCTION

Surgical removal of impacted third molar is the most commonly performed dento-alveolar procedure and is associated with post-operative pain, swelling and trismus.

AIM

The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of dexamethasone administered orally with that of dexamethasone administered as an intra-masseteric injection in surgical removal of mandibular third molars.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty patients with impacted mandibular third molars were selected to undergo surgical removal of mandibular third molars. They were divided into three groups of twenty each, viz., Control Group, Group taking Oral dexamethasone and Group taking Intra-masseteric dexamethasone. Evaluation was done over a period of seven days postoperatively to study the effects of the drug in terms of swelling, trismus and pain.

RESULTS

ANOVA test was done and comparisons were made. It was found that there was a statistically significant difference with respect to the group taking oral dexamethasone in terms of resolution of trismus. It was also found that there was no statistical significance with respect to reduction in swelling in either of the groups.

CONCLUSION

Thus, it can be concluded that the oral route is superior compared to the intramuscular route when administering dexamethasone in surgical removal of mandibular third molars, with respect to drug dosage, bio-availability and resolution of trismus.

Eventuality of Dexamethasone Injected Intra-massetrically on Post Operative Sequel Following the Surgical Extraction of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy of dexamethasone given intra-massetrically via intra buccal approach on postoperative sequele after surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars.

METHODOLOGY

Twenty patients, each of who required surgical extraction of a single impacted mandibular third molar under local anesthesia, were randomly set apart to one of the two groups of ten each. The experimental group received dexamethasone 8 mg injected to the masseter muscle intra buccally and the control group did not receive any steroid. Facial swelling and maximal inter-incisal distance were measured by an independent examiner preoperatively, and at 4th h, on the day of surgery, 2 and 7 postoperative days. Pain was measured from the patient's response to a visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

Patients were of the age range 18-40 years. Dexamethasone group showed significant reduction in swelling and pain compared with the control group at all intervals. Dexamethasone injected into the masseter muscle via intra buccal approach resulted in significantly less trismus than control on day one postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone 8 mg given intra-massetrically through intra buccal approach is an effective way of minimizing swelling, trismus, and pain following surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars. It offers a simple, safe, painless, non-invasive and cost-effective treatment.

Pre-emptive 8 mg dexamethasone and 120 mg etoricoxib for pain prevention after periodontal surgery: A randomised controlled clinical trial

Several anti-inflammatory drugs have been used to reduce pain and discomfort after periodontal surgeries. This study evaluates the efficacy of using etoricoxib and dexamethasone for pain prevention after open-flap debridement surgery. In this study, 60 patients who were undergoing open flap debridment surgery were randomly assigned to receive a single dose preoperative medication 1 hour prior to surgery. The patients were divided into three groups. In Group 1, 20 patients were given placebo drug orally. In Group 2, 20 patients were given 8 mg Dexamethasone orally and in Group 3, 20 patients were given 120 mg Etoricoxib orally. Patients were instructed to complete a pain diary hourly for the first 8 hours after each surgery and three times a day on the following 3 days. The four point verbal rating scale (VRS 4) and Numerical rate scale were used to assess discomfort. Post-operative Assessment of Pain and Discomfort showed that persistent discomfort and pain were found to be more in the placebo group compared to dexamethasone and etoricoxib group. The adoption of a preemptive medication protocol using either etoricoxib or dexamethasone may be considered effective for pain and discomfort prevention after open-flap debridement surgeries.

A randomized clinical trial of the effects of submucosal dexamethasone after surgery for mandibular fractures

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of immediate postoperative submucosal dexamethasone administration on postoperative pain, edema, trismus, and mandibular functions after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for mandibular fractures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study of 40 patients who required ORIF for mandibular fractures under general anesthesia. The patients were divided into 2 groups, an experimental group (n = 20) who received immediate postoperative submucosal 8 mg of dexamethasone through the surgical incision site, and a control group (n = 20) who did not receive dexamethasone. Pain was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) score and the frequency of analgesic consumption at the various postoperative intervals. The maximum interincisal distance and facial measurements were compared before surgery and at 24, 48, and 72 hours and 7 days after surgery. The difficulty in mandibular function after surgery was graded as mild, moderate, or severe.

RESULTS

The analgesic drugs required 2 hours after surgery and the VAS score 72 hours after surgery were significantly less (P < .05) in the experimental group than in the control group. The total number of diclofenac tablets required by the experimental group was less than that for the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant. The control group had significantly increased swelling (P < .05) compared with the experimental group from preoperatively to 24 hours postoperatively (experimental group 0.115 ± 0.143, control group 0.253 ± 0.173). No statistically significant difference was present in the mouth opening or difficulty in mandibular function at the different follow-up intervals between the 2 groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

The results of our study suggest that submucosal administration of dexamethasone after ORIF for mandibular fractures is effective in reducing postoperative pain and edema.

Pre-emptive effect of dexamethasone injection and consumption on post-operative swelling, pain, and trismus after third molar surgery. A prospective, double blind and randomized study

AIM

To evaluate the preventative effect of intravenous 4 mg of dexamethasone and 8 mg oral dexamethasone on post-operative pain, swelling and trismus after the surgical extraction of mandibular third molars.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A randomized clinical trial comprised of 200 patients (control group I intravenous and experimental group II orally) with impacted lower third molars, average age 20.8 years with no local or systemic problems, with bilateral impacted lower third molars, were operated under local anesthesia. Group I was given 4 mg IV and group II was given 8 mg orally of dexamethasone 1 h before procedure. The choice of which side to operate first and the amount of concentration of medication to use was made randomly and double-blindly. Post-operative pain was evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the degree of swelling was evaluated through facial reference points' variation. The presence of trismus was analyzed through measurement of the interincisal distance (IID). These assessments were obtained before the operation and 24 h, 48 h and 7th POD.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found in facial swelling and trismus between IV 4 mg injection and oral 8 mg consumption after lower third molar surgery (student t test P > 0.05). The visual analogue scale scores for pain assessment showed no significant difference between IV injection and oral route of dexamethasone (student t test P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients can be administered 8 mg oral dexamethasone is as effective as 4 mg intra venous route without much difference in final outcome at any given point of time.

A prospective randomized double-blind study to assess the latency and efficacy of twin-mix and 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine in surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars: a pilot study

INTRODUCTION

A prospective randomized double-blind study was conducted to assess the latency and duration of pterygomandibular nerve block with a mixture of 1.8 ml 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine and 1 ml of 4 mg dexamethasone and its impact on postoperative sequelae of surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was conducted as a prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial on 20 patients with bilateral impaction of mandibular third molars. A total of 40 interventions were included for the study, 20 with 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine (study group C, control) and 20 with the twin-mix (study group T, twin-mix), with a gap of 1 month between two interventions in a single patient. After injection of the anesthetic solution, the time to anesthetic effect, duration of anesthesia, and the need to re-anesthetize the surgical site were recorded. A 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess the overall pain intensity while injecting the study drug, during surgery, and in the postoperative period. pH of the test anesthetic solutions was also determined using a pH meter.

RESULTS

Twin-mix was found to be more basic than 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine. Mean VAS value for the pain/sting on local anesthetic injection/block was less in study group T. Time of onset of the local anesthetic was significantly less for the study group T, 51 ± 17.5 s when compared with patients in study group C (P less than 0.0001). The duration of soft tissue anesthesia was longer for all the patients in the study group T. On comparative evaluation between study group C and study group T, patients in the control group had more sever swelling and reduction in mouth opening in the postoperative period.

DISCUSSION

The addition of dexamethasone to lignocaine and its administration as an intra-space injection significantly shortens the latency and prolongs the duration of the soft tissue anesthesia, with improved quality of life in the postoperative period after surgical extraction of mandibular third molars.

Effect of submucosal injection of dexamethasone on postoperative discomfort after third molar surgery: a prospective study

AIM

To evaluate the relative ability of 4 mg dose of intraoperative dexamethasone, administered submucosally, to reduce the postoperative discomfort after third molar surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 100 patients requiring surgical removal of a single mandibular third molar were included. The experimental group (50) received dexamethasone 4 mg as submucosal injection and control group (50) received no drugs. The maximum interincisal distance and facial contours were measured at baseline and at postsurgery days 2 and 7. The measurement of pain was done using visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

None of the patients developed wound infection or any serious postoperative complications. Postoperative edema tended to be less severe on the second postoperative day in the experimental group and the result was statistically significant. There were no significant differences in the reduction of pain and trismus between the two groups studied.

CONCLUSION

Submucosal administration of dexamethasone sodium phosphate (4 mg) results in reduction of postoperative edema, comparable with or greater than other routes of administration. Presumably, a higher effective drug concentration at the site of injury without loss due to distribution to other compartments may be achieved, and the submucosal route is convenient for both the surgeon and the patient.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Submucosal route of administration of dexamethasone (4 mg) is effective in reducing postoperative discomfort after third molar surgeries.

What strategies are helpful in the operative management of third molars?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review was to investigate and report strategies that might improve patient recovery after third molar (M3) surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a literature review on various topics to identify the methods of improving outcomes after M3 removal. Numerous topics were reviewed, including patient age, flap design, effect of smoking, use of antibacterial rinses, pre-emptive analgesia, and the role of antibiotics and corticosteroids in recovery.

RESULTS

Increased patient age appears to be a factor in a higher complication rate, but the literature is sparse. The results of studies on flap design are contradictory, but there is no difference in long-term periodontal health. Systematic reviews clearly show that longer periods of smoking cessation decrease surgical complications, but few studies have addressed M3 surgery. Likewise, the role of pre-emptive analgesia, although beneficial in a general surgical setting, has not been studied thoroughly with regard to M3 surgery. The use of chlorhexidine rinses to prevent alveolar osteitis and surgical site infection has been studied extensively, but meta-analyses have not convincingly proved this effect. The evidence is convincing that antibiotics decrease alveolar osteitis and surgical site infection. Similarly, it is clear that corticosteroids decrease postoperative trismus and edema; however, the role of steroids in decreasing pain is not proved.

CONCLUSION

This review found various factors associated with improving recovery and minimizing complications in M3 surgery.

Strategies used to inhibit postoperative swelling following removal of impacted lower third molar

Postoperative swelling following different surgical strategies is an area of great interest. The main part of literature on the topic deals with swelling after extraction of low impacted third molar. In this review, we have analyzed publications of the last 20 years with a pubmed search using the following key words: impacted third molar, swelling third molar, wisdom tooth, edema jaw, corticosteroids and extraction third molar, antibiotic prophylaxis and tooth extraction. Attention has often been focused on corticosteroid therapy administered by diverse routes (orally, IV, IM, topically) and at different time schedules (before or after surgery or both). This investigation revealed how the use of different molecules and dosages makes the obtained results hardly comparable. Similar conclusions can be drawn from studies aimed at evaluating the efficacy of antibiotic therapy administered either before or after surgery. A complete review has also to take into account different surgical strategies used including various flaps, no traumatic osteothomy, and primary or secondary closure. The use of pharmacological therapy and application of an ice pack is critical in the postoperative period and has always provided positive results. However, even if it is difficult to come to definite conclusions, due to the variability of the design of studies analyzed, the postoperative discomfort identified with edema, pain and trismus following wisdom tooth removal is influenced by various factors such as the difficulty of the surgical procedure involved, age and gender of the patient, and experience of the surgeon. The pharmacological therapy when performed with corticosteroids seems to improve control of the postoperative swelling related with this kind of surgeries.