Piezo-surgery technique and intramuscular dexamethasone injection to reduce postoperative pain after impacted mandibular third molar surgery: a randomized clinical trial

Piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy: a randomized clinical trial on pain and anxiety in children with unerupted mandibular third molars

OBJECTIVE

Dental anxiety for unerupted mandibular third molars extraction in children under local anesthesia is a tricky problem. The purpose of this study was to compare psychological and physiologic findings of extractions of unerupted mandibular third molars in children by piezosurgery and conventional osteotomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, single-center, double-blind study included children who required extraction of mandibular third molars under local anesthesia. All subjects were randomly divided into two groups: piezosurgery and conventional osteotomy (control). The primary outcome variables were dental anxiety assessed by the Modified Child Fear Survey Schedule Dental Subscale (CFSS-DS) and postoperative pain qualified by the visual analog scale (VAS). Secondary outcome variables included blood pressure, heart rate, saturation, and operation duration. The data were analyzed by t-test and chi-square test (P ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

All 40 study patients (37.5% males and 62.5% females with an average age of 14.43 ± 1.32 years) completed the entire trial. There were no statistically significant differences observed between the two groups in terms of gender allocation, age, side of extraction, and Winter's Classification (P > 0.05). The operation duration of the piezosurgery group was significantly longer than the conventional osteotomy group (P < 0.01). The VAS scores showed that pain levels of children in the piezosurgery group were significantly less than the conventional osteotomy group on the first and third days postoperatively (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively). The CFSS-DS score in the piezosurgery group significantly decreased compared to the conventional osteotomy group (P < 0.05). Compared with the conventional osteotomy group, a significant decrease in heart rate, and lower systolic and diastolic blood pressures were observed after extraction in the piezosurgery group (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional osteotomy, piezosurgery can effectively reduce postoperative pain and have some effect in relieving dental anxiety for the extraction of unerupted mandibular third molars in children.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Piezosurgery may be a viable technique for the extraction of unerupted mandibular third molars in children under local anesthesia.

A randomized controlled trial comparing conventional and piezosurgery methods in mandibular bone block harvesting from the retromolar region

BACKGROUND

Although piezosurgery is now commonly used for various applications in maxillofacial surgery, its advantages over conventional rotary instruments in terms of postoperative edema, ecchymosis, postoperative morbidity, and prolonged osteotomy time have been questioned.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study aimed to compare the efficiency, postoperative morbidity, and complication rates of piezosurgery and conventional methods in harvesting autogenous ramus grafts. In this randomized controlled trial, 21 patients (32 sides) underwent autogenous graft harvesting from the ramus area, with 16 sites treated using piezosurgery and 16 using the conventional method. The primary outcomes measured were osteotomy time, total operation time, and postoperative morbidity. Complication rates were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The final analysis encompassed 19 patients, accounting for a total of 30 donor sites, following the exclusion of two patients who were unable to attend the scheduled follow-up visits. A total of 19 patients (30 donor sites) were included in the final analysis. No statistically significant difference was found in the mean osteotomy time between the piezosurgery group (mean: 10.35, SD: 2.74 min) and the conventional group (mean: 8.74, SD: 2.74 min) (95% CI: -3.67 to 0.442, p = 0.119). The total operation time, postoperative pain, and swelling were not significantly different between the two groups (p > 0.05). The complication rates, including wound dehiscence and inferior alveolar nerve exposure, were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Piezosurgery can be safely used for harvesting autogenous ramus grafts and does not increase osteotomy or total operation time compared to the conventional method. The postoperative morbidity and complication rates were also similar, indicating that both techniques can be effectively employed in clinical practice.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT05548049, First registration date: 21/09/2022).

Comparative Study of the Surgical Excision of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars Using Surgical Burs and an Erbium-Doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet (Er:YAG) Laser

Background The use of lasers has increased in the field of dentistry in recent years. However, in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery, the use of lasers has been largely restricted to soft tissue, and less focus is placed on the use of lasers for hard tissues. Aim The present study aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficacy of a erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser for cutting the bone while removing the impacted mandibular third molar with the use of a surgical bur. Methods The study assessed 80 subjects undergoing removal of impacted mandibular third molars. The subjects were recruited from the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Luxmi Bai Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Patiala, Punjab, India. They were randomly divided into two groups, each consisting of 40 subjects. Group I used an Er:YAG laser to remove the bone, while Group II used a surgical bur. Assessments and comparisons were made for complications, wound healing, trismus, edema, bleeding, and pain. Results The study examined the efficacy of the Er:YAG laser for cutting the bone and extracting the impacted mandibular third molars using a surgical bur in two groups of 80 patients each. When the laser was used in place of a surgical bur, Group I patients experienced less edema, bleeding, and discomfort; nevertheless, the difference was not statistically significant. Time taken by laser for bone cutting was significantly higher compared to the surgical bur. In Group I (laser), trismus existed for a longer time. For mouth opening, the preoperative mouth opening was comparable in the two groups with p = 0.87. Conclusion Pain, hemorrhage, and edema were lesser, and the time required for bone cutting was substantially longer in the laser group. Apart from these, laser-assisted intra-oral bone cutting should be preferred because of its less invasive nature, simpler procedure, and simpler osteotomy when compared to traditional surgical burs and also in anxiety-prone patients.

Comparison of preemptive etoricoxib and dexamethasone in third molar surgery - a randomized controlled clinical trial of patient-reported and clinical outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To compare preemptive single-dose etoricoxib and dexamethasone on postoperative patient satisfaction (pPS) and clinical parameters following the impacted mandibular third molar (IMTM) extraction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A parallel-group, triple-blinded, controlled clinical study included a total of 90 patients (n = 30), randomized to receive: etoricoxib 90 mg, dexamethasone 4 mg, or no premedication (control group) 1 h before surgery. Paracetamol 500 mg was prescribed as rescue medication (RM). Check-ups were scheduled at 24 h, 48 h, and day 7 post-surgery. At each time point, pPS was assessed using the 5-point Likert scale. RM parameters, swelling, trismus, and the occurrence of adverse events were also recorded, and patients were instructed to rate the perceived pain on Visual Analogue Scale.

RESULTS

In all the follow-up periods, data indicated significantly higher pPS scores in the preemptive medication groups when compared to the control group (p < 0.05). Both regimens delayed the first RM intake when compared to controls. In the etoricoxib group, a significantly lower total RM consumption was observed (p < 0.05). Dexamethasone significantly decreased swelling at each check-up and increased mouth opening at day 7 after the surgery (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive etoricoxib and dexamethasone elevate pPS after IMTM surgery. Etoricoxib improves RM parameters, while dexamethasone ameliorates the patient's postoperative functional ability.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Preemptive etoricoxib and dexamethasone use may decrease patients' discomfort following the impacted mandibular third molar extraction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05791721. Date of Registration: 28/03/2023 (retrospectively registered).

Three-dimensional facial swelling evaluation of pre-operative single-dose of prednisone in third molar surgery: a split-mouth randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Facial swelling, pain, and trismus are the most common postoperative sequelae after mandibular third molar (M3M) surgery. Corticosteroids are the most used drugs to reduce the severity of inflammatory symptoms after M3M surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a single pre-operative dose of prednisone on pain, trismus, and swelling after M3M surgery.

METHODS

This study was designed as a split-mouth randomized, controlled, triple-blind trial with two treatment groups, prednisone (PG) and control (CG). All the parameters were assessed before the extraction (T0), two days (T1), and seven days after surgery (T2). Three-dimensional evaluation of facial swelling was performed with Bellus 3D Face App. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to assess pain. The maximum incisal distance was recorded with a calibrated rule to evaluate the trismus. The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to evaluate the normal distribution of each variable. To compare the two study groups, the analysis of variance was performed using a two-tailed Student t-test for normal distributions. The level of significance was set at a = 0.05. Statistical analysis was conducted using the software STATA (STATA 11, StataCorp, College Station, TX).

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were recruited with a mean age of 23.6 ± 3.7 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 1:3. A total of 64 M3Ms (32 right and 32 left) were randomly assigned to PG or CG. Surgery time recorded a mean value of 15.6 ± 3.7 min, without statistically significant difference between the groups. At T1, PG showed a significantly lower facial swelling compared to CG (PG: 3.3 ± 2.1 mm; CG: 4.2 ± 1.7 mm; p = 0.02). Similar results were recorded comparing the groups one week after surgery (PG: 1.2 ± 1.2; CG: 2.1 ± 1.3; p = 0.0005). All patients reported a decrease in facial swelling from T1 to T2 without differences between the two groups. At T1, the maximum buccal opening was significantly reduced than T0, and no difference between PG (35.6 ± 8.2 mm) and CG (33.7 ± 7.3 mm) (p > 0.05) was shown. Similar results were reported one week after surgery (PG: 33.2 ± 14.4 mm; CG: 33.7 ± 13.1 mm; p > 0.05). PG showed significantly lower pain values compared to CG, both at T1 (PG: 3.1 ± 1.5; CG: 4.6 ± 1.8; p = 0.0006) and T2 (PG: 1.0 ± 0.8; CG: 1.9 ± 1.4; p = 0.0063).

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that pre-operative low-dose prednisone administration could reduce postoperative sequelae by improving patient comfort after M3M surgery and reducing facial swelling two days and one week after surgical procedures.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov - NCT05830747 retrospectively recorded-Date of registration: 26/04/2023.

Glucocorticoids added to paracetamol and NSAIDs for post-operative pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended as the basic pain treatment regimen for most surgeries. Glucocorticoids have well-known anti-inflammatory and anti-emetic properties and may also demonstrate analgesic effects. We assessed benefit and harm of adding glucocorticoids to a combination of paracetamol and NSAIDs for post-operative pain management.

METHODS

We searched Embase, Medline and CENTRAL for randomised clinical trials investigating the addition of glucocorticoids versus placebo/no intervention to paracetamol and an NSAID in adults undergoing any type of surgery. We assessed three primary outcomes: cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h postoperatively, serious adverse events and pain at rest at 24 h postoperatively. We performed meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA), assessed risk of bias using the Risk of Bias 2 tool and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 12 relevant trials of which nine trials randomising 804 participants were included in quantitative analysis. When added to paracetamol and NSAIDs, we found no evidence of a difference of glucocorticoids versus placebo/no intervention in cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h postoperatively (mean difference [MD] -0.28, TSA-adjusted 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.90 to 1.33, p = .68, moderate certainty of evidence), serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, TSA-adjusted 95% CI 0.27-3.63, p = .93, very low certainty of evidence) or pain on the Numeric Rating Scale at 24 h postoperatively (MD -0.39, TSA-adjusted 95% CI -0.84 to 0.17, p = .10, moderate certainty of evidence). All outcomes were assessed to be at high risk of bias and TSA showed that we had insufficient information for most outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Glucocorticoids added to a baseline therapy of paracetamol and an NSAID likely result in little to no difference in cumulative opioid consumption and pain at rest at 24 h postoperatively. In addition, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on serious adverse events. For most outcomes we did not have sufficient information to draw firm conclusions and the certainty of the evidence varied from moderate to very low.

EDITORIAL COMMENT

Multimodal approaches for post-operative analgesia are favoured, including paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In this meta-analysis, pooled results from clinical trials are assessed to describe possible benefit of addition of glucocorticoid treatment for analgesia. The findings did not identify additional benefit, though the certainty of the evidence was not high.

A Pilot Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Piezo Versus Conventional Rotary Surgery for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars

Background: The extraction of impacted mandibular third molars is a frequent dental surgery, interfering with patients’ quality of life. Ultrasonic surgery is an alternative to osteotomy with conventional rotary instruments. This study compares postoperative signals and symptoms after extracting impacted mandibular third molars using ultrasonic surgery or conventional rotary osteotomy. Methods: A pilot randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted. Thirty patients were randomly divided into the test group (ultrasonic technique) and a control group (conventional rotatory technique). All surgeries were timed. Swelling parameters, trismus and paraesthesia were evaluated on the day of surgery and the third, fifth and seventh postoperative days. Intraoperative bleeding was evaluated during surgery. Postoperative pain was evaluated daily by the patient through a visual analogue scale and the number of ingested analgesics. Results: Pain, swelling and trismus present beneficial results with the ultrasonic technique but without statistical significance. Intraoperative bleeding was significantly lower with ultrasonic surgery (t(28) = 3.258; p = 0.003). Operating time was significantly higher in extractions involving osteotomy and cutting crown and roots either with the conventional technique (p = 0.020) or ultrasonic technique (p = 0.039). Regardless of the surgical difficulty, no statistically significant results were detected between techniques regarding the procedure duration. Conclusions: The beneficial postoperative signs and symptoms make ultrasonic surgery a favourable therapeutic option, especially when the integrity of noble anatomical structures is the most important risk factor. Further studies with larger samples are needed to support the use of piezosurgery as a valid option for impacted mandibular third molar extraction.

Retrospective Analysis of the Effect of Lidocaine Combined with Methylprednisolone on Pain Control After Uterine Artery Embolization

Background

The analgesic effect produced by the intra-arterial injection of lidocaine in patients undergoing uterine artery embolization has been proven to be safe and effective. Nevertheless, a significant degree of pain is typically experienced after the operation, and pain management is crucial. Methylprednisolone, which provides an anti-inflammatory effect, is widely used in the treatment of several diseases. To date, methylprednisolone has not been used after uterine artery embolization.

Methods

A total of 131 patients with uterine leiomyoma were retrospectively enrolled. Forty-five patients (control group) were treated with embolized microspheres for bilateral uterine artery embolization. Fifty (study group) and 36 (lidocaine group) patients were administered lidocaine mixed with embolized microspheres during embolization, and in addition, the study group was administered methylprednisolone. Completed pain scales at different time points during surgery were obtained from patients undergoing uterine artery embolization. Efficacy against pain was evaluated by comparing the pain score, inflammatory index, and use of sufentanil within 24 h followed by a Kruskal-Wallis Test and a least significant difference post-hoc analysis.

Results

The postoperative pain scores at 1, 4, and 7 h after uterine artery embolization in the study group (3.08 ± 2.09, 2.46 ± 1.93, and 2.38 ± 1.85, respectively) were significantly lower than those in the control group (4.84 ± 2.36, 4.16 ± 1.87, and 3.56 ± 1.93, respectively) and the lidocaine group (3.50 ± 2.10, 3.30 ± 1.88, and 3.28 ± 1.89, respectively). At the first 24 h after embolization, the total usage of sufentanil in the study group (31.4 ± 4.16) was significantly lower than those in the control group (45.7 ± 6.51) and the lidocaine group (38.3 ± 6.25). At 1 and 4 h, the pain scores of the lidocaine group were significantly lower than those of the control group. In addition, at the first 24 h after embolization, the total usage of sufentanil in the lidocaine group was significantly lower than that in the control group.

Conclusion

Lidocaine in combination with methylprednisolone can significantly alleviate pain and reduce the usage of sufentanil after bilateral uterine artery embolization. Thus, methylprednisolone is a recommended addition to the therapeutic regimen after embolization.