Measuring pain after oral surgery

Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Preserving Alveolar Ridge Volume and Reducing Postoperative Pain in Site Preservation of Post-Extracted Sockets

Background and Objectives: In socket preservation, the goal is to minimize bone resorption after tooth extraction to maintain the volume and contour of the alveolar ridge. The use of PRF in post extraction sites may reduce ridge resorption by encouraging the growth of new bone and acting as a scaffold for tissue. In addition, PRF may enhance healing and minimize postoperative pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) in maintaining the ridges' dimensions at the extraction site, in the maxilla and mandible, as well as its impact on post-extraction discomfort. Methods: The study was conducted on 60 patients presenting for extraction of posterior teeth and was randomly divided into three groups: group I PRF (n = 20), group II PRF + collagen (n = 20), and group III control (n = 20). Sockets were filled with PRF (group I) and PRF + collagen (group II). At baseline and follow-up after 3 months, CBCT was used to assess the bone dimensions. The postoperative pain evaluations were performed at 24 h, 3 days, and 7 days after the tooth extraction. The pain rate was evaluated using a numerical rating scale from the British Pain Society. Results: The study examined the effects of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and PRF combined with collagen on the height and width of the ridges, as well as the pain experienced by the patients following alveolar ridge preservation surgery. ANOVA and t-tests were used to evaluate and compare the ridge dimensions. Comparing the results to the control group, there were no significant differences in the height or width of the ridges. However, both the PRF and PRF + Collaplug® treatments effectively reduced the short-term postoperative pain. Conclusions: The study findings suggest that platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and PRF combined with collagen do not exert significant effects on ridge width and height compared to the standard treatment following alveolar ridge preservation. However, it is noteworthy that both the PRF and PRF + collagen treatments demonstrated efficacy in reducing postoperative pain in the short term, offering a potential advantage over standard treatment protocols.

COMPARATIVE ANALGESIC EFFECTS OF SINGLE-DOSE PREOPERATIVE ADMINISTRATION OF PARACETAMOL (ACETAMINOPHEN) 500 mg PLUS CODEINE 30 mg AND IBUPROFEN 400 mg ON PAIN AFTER THIRD MOLAR SURGERY

BACKGROUND

Efficacy and rapid onset of postsurgical oral pain relief are critical to improve clinical outcomes and reduce the risk of excessive dosing with analgesic drugs.

PURPOSE

To compare analgesic effects of preoperative administration of paracetamol 500 mg plus codeine 30 mg in single-tablet and effervescent formulation to ibuprofen 400 mg, and placebo in the management of moderate to severe postoperative pain after mandibular third molar surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred twenty healthy outpatients aged 15-29 years undergoing surgical removal of 1 bony impacted mandibular third molar were enrolled in this, single-center, prospective, randomized, triple-blind parallel-group, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Study participants were randomly assigned to three treatment arms. According to the concealed allocation, each patient 30 minutes before surgery received paracetamol 500 mg plus codeine 30 mg (group APAP/COD), ibuprofen 400 mg (group IBU) or placebo (group PLA). Rescue therapy allowed in the postoperative period was paracetamol 500 mg plus codeine 30 mg in groups APAP/COD and PLA and ibuprofen 400 mg in group IBU. Patients recorded on Numerical Rating Scale-11 (NRS-11) the pain intensity, total number of postoperative-supplement medications and time of the first intake, until 12-hours after surgery and over extra 2 days, RESULTS: Over postoperative 3 days, patients in the APAP/COD group (2.33 ± 1.99) displayed significantly (P< .001) less pain intensity than IBU (3.43 ± 2.47) and placebo (3.57 ± 2.62) groups. The first-day postoperative pain was significantly (P < .001) higher in group PLA than in groups APAP/COD and IBU, but not between the latter 2 groups. However, at 2 hours postdose, the IBU group displayed average pain intensity lower than APAP/COD group (P> .05). On the next 2 days, pain intensity was significantly (P< .001) lower in group APAP/COD than in groups IBU and PLA but failed to reach statistical significance between groups IBU and PLA. Although the time to the first using rescue therapy was longer (445.88 ± 159.96 minute) in group IBU, compared to groups APAP/COD (392.67 ± 138.90 minutes) and PLA (323.00 ± 143.95 minutes), the number of supplemented tablets was significantly higher in group IBU (2.89 ± 2.13) than in groups APAP/COD (1.24 ± 1.79) (P= .001) and PLA (1.53 ± 1.67) (P = .008). No adverse events were registered for all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of the present study, over postoperative 3 days, a statistically significant intensity pain reduction and decreased rescue therapy consumption were recorded in the paracetamol-codeine group than to ibuprofen group. Nevertheless, lower pain intensity at 2 hours postdose and longer time using rescue therapy was found in the ibuprofen group without statistical significance. No adverse events occurred over the studied period.

Postoperative Pain Management Using Supplemental Bupivacaine After Mandibular Orthognathic Surgery: A Triple-Blind Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

The objective of this triple-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was to assess the clinical analgesic efficacy of 0.5% bupivacaine in acute postoperative pain management after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (BSSO).

METHODS

Patients were randomly allocated into the experimental (0.5% bupivacaine with 1:200000 epinephrine) or control group (normal saline - placebo) using block randomization. The interventions were administered at the inferior alveolar nerve block and buccal nerve block sites bilaterally after the BSSO surgery. Analgesic efficacy was assessed in terms of the patient's pain perception measured by a numerical rating scale (0 to 10), rescue drug requirement, and duration of analgesia for 24 hours after the surgery. The statistical analysis was blinded to the allocation groups, and P-value of <.05 was considered as a significant difference for all tests.

RESULTS

In total, 28 patients underwent BSSO (ie, 14 in each group). There was no significant difference in pain perception of patients injected with 0.5% bupivacaine and those administered with placebo during the 24 hours after the surgery (P > .05). Three patients in the bupivacaine group took the rescue drug after the surgery (mean duration - 268 minutes) and 1 patient in the placebo group took the rescue drug after 27 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative use of bupivacaine did not show a superior analgesic efficacy when compared with normal saline in controlling acute postoperative pain after BSSO.

Effects of ibuprofen administration timing on oral surgery pain: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the analgesic effect of ibuprofen 400 mg given 30 min before or immediately after third molars surgery under local anaesthesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The single-centre, randomized, split-mouth, triple-blind, clinical trial involved 38 outpatients, for a total of 76 bilateral symmetrical fully bone impacted mandibular third molars. Each patient was undergone to separate surgical sessions for the right and left side, and ibuprofen was randomly administered 30 min before or immediately after the intervention. Study participants recorded pain intensity using Numerical Rating Scale-11, the timing of rescue therapy intake and overall tablets consumption over 3 days.

RESULTS

The overall pain intensity score was lower in the group receiving ibuprofen immediately after (3.13 ± 2.46) than before (3.58 ± 2.40) surgery, with statistically significant differences only on the second and third days. The mean time to the first using rescue therapy was longer in the postoperative (598.33 ± 422.62 min) than in the preoperative (406.25 ± 149.79 min) analgesic treatment group (p = .123). The number of supplemented ibuprofen tablets did not differ (p = .530) between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of the present study, ibuprofen administration immediately after surgery seemed to be more effective than preoperative administration.

The use of platelet-rich fibrin to enhance the outcomes of implant therapy: A systematic review

Objective

To assess the impact of platelet‐rich fibrin (PRF) on implant dentistry. The primary focused question was as follows: What are the clinical, histological, and radiographic outcomes of PRF administration for bone regeneration and implant therapy?

Method

A systematic literature search comprised three databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane followed by a hand search of relevant scientific journals. Human studies using PRF for bone regeneration and implant therapy were considered and articles published up to December 31, 2017 were included. Eligible studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and controlled clinical trials (CCT) were included.

Results

In total, 5,963 titles were identified with the search terms and by hand search. A total of 12 randomized controlled trials (RCT) met the inclusion criteria and were chosen for data extraction. Included studies focused on alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction, osseointegration process, soft tissue management, bone augmentation, bone regeneration after sinus floor elevation and surgical peri‐implantitis treatment. Overall, the risk of bias was moderate or unclear. Nine studies showed superior outcomes for PRF for any of the evaluated variables, such as ridge dimension, bone regeneration, osseointegration process, soft tissue healing. Three studies failed to show any beneficial effects of PRF. No meta‐analysis could be performed due to the heterogeneity of study designs.

Conclusions

There is moderate evidence supporting the clinical benefit of PRF on ridge preservation and in the early phase of osseointegration. It remains unclear whether PRF can reduce pain and improve soft tissue healing. More research support is necessary to comment on the role of PRF to improve other implant therapy outcomes.

Pain measurement in oral and maxillofacial surgery

Regardless of whether it is acute or chronic, the assessment of pain should be simple and practical. Since the intensity of pain is thought to be one of the primary factors that determine its effect on a human's overall function and sense, there are many scales to assess pain. The aim of the current article was to review pain intensity scales that are commonly used in dental and oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). Previous studies demonstrated that multidimensional scales, such as the McGill Pain Questionnaire, Short form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire, and Wisconsin Brief Pain Questionnaire were suitable for assessing chronic pain, while unidimensional scales, like the Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), Verbal descriptor scale, Verbal rating scale, Numerical rating Scale, Faces Pain Scale, Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBS), and Full Cup Test, were used to evaluate acute pain. The WBS is widely used to assess pain in children and elderly because other scales are often difficult to understand, which could consequently lead to an overestimation of the pain intensity. In dental or OMFS research, the use of the VAS is more common because it is more reliable, valid, sensitive, and appropriate. However, some researchers use NRS to evaluate OMFS pain in adults because this scale is easier to use than VAS and yields relatively similar pain scores. This review only assessed pain scales used for post-operative OMFS or dental pain.

Efficacy of Preoperative Administration of Paracetamol-Codeine on Pain following Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Surgery: A Randomized, Split-Mouth, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Objectives. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of preoperative administration of single-dose of paracetamol-codeine, in the relieving of acute postoperative pain after the surgical removal of an impacted mandibular third molar. Materials and Methods. The study cohort consisted of 32 Caucasian outpatients, giving a total of 64 bilateral symmetrical impacted mandibles. Patients were randomized in two experimental groups to receive a preoperative oral dose of paracetamol-codeine (analgesic group) or a placebo (placebo group) at the first and second surgeries. Study participants were asked to record pain intensity scores during the operation and the next 2 days, the time of the first request for rescue analgesic, and the total number of postoperative-supplement paracetamol-codeine tablets. Results. The pain intensity score on the first day was significantly lower in the analgesic group than in the placebo group (p < 0.001). The time to using rescue therapy was significantly longer in the analgesic group than in the placebo group (p = 0.004). The number of paracetamol-codeine tablets used postoperatively did not differ between the analgesic and placebo groups (p = 0.104). Conclusions. Preoperative paracetamol-codeine is effective in providing immediate postoperative pain control after third molar surgery and in delaying the initial onset of pain. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (Registration Number): NCT03049878.