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

IS THE PHOTOBIOMODULATION THERAPY EFFECTIVE IN CONTROLLING POST-SURGICAL SIDE EFFECTS AFTER THE EXTRACTION OF MANDIBULAR THIRD MOLARS? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

OBJECTIVES

The extraction of third molars is one of the most performed surgical procedures in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Pain, oedema, and trismus are the most frequently complications related in the surgical postoperative period. The literature has indicated PBM as a potential adjuvant method to reduce these complications. The aim of this review and meta-analysis is evaluate the PBM, as an optimal method to improve patient experience and minimize postoperative morbidity. Additionally, we seek to determine which wavelength, site, and frequency of application are most effective.

METHODS

This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023429966) and followed PRISMA guidelines. The search was carried out in the main databases, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, and Lilacs, including reviews in the most important journals in the area of oral surgery and laser applied to oral surgery. In addition, all article references and also gray literature were reviewed. After the studies selection, the relevant data was collected. All the studies were randomized controlled trials and the patients were allocated into two groups: active PBM and inactive PBM. The statistical analysis was carried out using Stata v.16, and the methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed by the Jadad scale and RoB 2.0, respectively.

RESULTS

Where included 22 studies and 989 subjects, to all with a minimum follow-up of 7 days. Pain and oedema showed statistically significant results in favor to the active PBM group. Especially when laser applied in infrared mode, for pain and oedema at 48 h, MD = -1.80 (CI95% -2.88, -0.72) I² = 92.13% and MD = -1.45 (CI95% -2.42, -0.48) I² = 65.01%, respectively. The same is not true for trismus at 48 h, MD = 0.07 (CI95% -0.06, 0.21) I² = 3.26%. The meta-analysis also presented results in respect of laser site of application and number of PBM sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

PBM with infrared laser, in a combination intraoral and extraoral application, in one session in the immediate postoperative period, has been shown to be effective to achieve the objectives of reducing pain and oedema after third molar extraction.

Efficacy of Dexamethasone Injection at Different Sites on Postoperative Sequelae After Extracting Mandibular Impacted Third Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Dexamethasone, an efficacious anti-inflammatory agent, is widely used after tooth extraction. However, its optimal injection site is yet to be investigated.

PURPOSE

We compare the efficacy of dexamethasone injection at different sites on postoperative sequelae after extracting mandibular impacted third molars (MITMs).

STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, AND SAMPLE

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. Healthy adults with fully MITMs scheduled for extraction were included. Exclusion criteria were 1) patients with the systemic alteration that prevented the surgical procedure; 2) pregnancy, breastfeeding, and premenstrual period; 3) hypersensitivity to the drug under test; and 4) those who did not return for postoperative follow-up at 1, 3, and 7 days.

EXPOSURE VARIABLE

The subjects were randomized to 3 groups. An online randomization plan generator assigned each subject to a single treatment by randomly permuting blocks. Different sites for postoperative dexamethasone injections included the buccal side of the adjacent second molar and extraction sockets. Dexamethasone injection (4 mg) on the buccal side of the adjacent second molar (group 1), an injection on the buccal side of extraction sockets (group 2), and an injection of physiological saline (0.8 mL) on the buccal side of the adjacent second molar (control).

MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES

The outcome variables were postoperative facial swelling, limitation of the mouth opening, postoperative pain, and postoperative quality of life evaluation. The pain was assessed using a visual analog scale at 1, 3, and 7 days, postoperatively. The quality of life was recorded throughout the Posse scale at 7 days.

COVARIATES

The covariates are age, sex, length of operation, and type of impacted teeth and surgery.

ANALYSES

The statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance, repeated measures analysis of variance, χ2 test, or Fisher's exact tests with P values < .05 considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Our study included 58 participants with a mean age of 19.48 ± 3.31 years; group 1 (n = 24), group 2 (n = 20), and control group (n = 14). On day 3 postoperative, the swelling and trismus were significantly less in group 1 than in the other 2 groups (P < .05), and group 1 had an overall postoperative quality of life compared to other groups (P < .05). Unaffected speech function was present in 73.7% of patients in group 1, while 50% of patients in group 2 had affected speech function 3 days after the operation (P < .05). The "unable to open mouth" of the "Eating subscale" and "felt tingling" had statistical significance (P < .05).

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Dexamethasone injections on the buccal side of the adjacent second molar can be a viable option for treating facial swelling and limitation of mouth opening after total MITMs extraction.

Analgesics effect of local diclofenac in third molar surgery: a randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of locally diclofenac application on postoperative pain, sequalae, and adverse effects following mandibular third molar (MTM) surgery.

METHODS

A randomized, crossover, double-blind, controlled trial was conducted in 20 patients who required surgical removal of bilateral symmetrical impacted MTM at two separate appointments. The 40 MTMs were randomly allocated to two groups. One side was assigned 0.1% w/v diclofenac sodium as the diclofenac group. The contralateral side was assigned phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) as the control group. Postoperative pain intensity was measured by visual analogue scale (VAS), where the time when the first pain emerged, the time to first rescue medication, pain at 6 and 24 h after surgery, and the total number of analgesics consumed were recorded. Postoperative swelling and trismus were assessed on postoperative days 2 and 7. The differences of continuous outcomes between two groups were analyzed by paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

VAS scores were significantly lower when the first pain emerged and 6 h after surgery in diclofenac group (p < 0.05). The onset of pain in the diclofenac group was significantly longer than in the control group (p < 0.05). Two patients reported mild nausea and dizziness in the diclofenac group.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the analgesic effectiveness of 0.1% local application of diclofenac within 6 h postoperative with few side effects.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Locally diclofenac application is an alternative of postoperative analgesic in MTM surgery which provides pain-free periods within 6 h.

Comparison of Platelet-Rich Fibrin and Iodoform Gauze in the Treatment of Localized Alveolitis

PURPOSE

Iodoform gauze is commonly used to treat patients with localized alveolitis; however, saliva can easily dilute the iodoform concentration. This study aimed to compare the efficacies of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and iodoform gauze in treating localized alveolitis.

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with localized alveolitis who received treatment at our hospital from January 2018 to July 2021. They were randomly assigned to the control (treated with iodoform gauze) or experimental (treated with PRF) groups. Treatment method was the predictor variable. The primary outcome variable was clinical efficacy, defined as symptom resolution 1 week after treatment. Secondary outcome variables included granulation tissue (GT) quantitative score, analgesic drug dosage, and pain score determined using a visual analog scale (VAS). Patient demographics were used as covariates. Data analysis was performed by carrying out the χ2 and Mann-Whitney rank sum tests; P values <.05 indicated statistical significance.

RESULTS

This study included 60 patients, equally and randomly divided into the control and PRF groups (n = 30 each). There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics of patients between the 2 groups. One week after treatment, the PRF group showed a higher healing rate (93.3% vs 60.0%) and better GT quantitative score (3.13 ± 0.63 vs 1.70 ± 0.75) than the control group (P < .05). Moreover, the number of analgesic tablets consumed within 1 week postoperatively was lesser in the PRF group than in the control group (3.93 ± 1.53 vs 9.67 ± 3.16, P < .05). The PRF group exhibited significantly lower VAS pain scores than those of the control group on the 3rd day (1.10 ± 1.03 vs 4.17 ± 1.49) and 7th day (0.30 ± 0.60 vs 1.73 ± 1.44, P < .05) postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with iodoform gauze, PRF is associated with higher healing rate, faster promotion of GT growth in the extraction socket, better relief of alveolar pain, and lower intake of analgesic drugs when treating localized alveolitis.

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).

Current and emerging COX inhibitors for treating postoperative pain following oral surgery

INTRODUCTION

The numerous drugs in the NSAID class are often used to treat acute postoperative pain associated with oral surgery such as impacted third-molar extractions. These drugs are effective in this setting and dental pain studies often serve as models for acute pain relief and for registration of analgesics. With numerous cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors available as monotherapy, for use in combination with analgesic regimens, and in different doses and formulations, it was our aim to determine if there were clear-cut distinctions among these products and dosing regimens.

AREAS COVERED

This is a literature review of recent randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating NSAIDs for use in postoperative pain management following oral surgery. Of particular interest were head-to-head studies, which might offer some insight into comparative effectiveness.

EXPERT OPINION

Postoperative oral surgery pain is largely managed in real-world clinical practice using NSAIDs, either alone or in combination, and there is good evidence supporting their use especially in multimodal therapy. Head-to-head and comparative studies do not show a clear-cut 'optimal NSAID' in this setting, although ibuprofen, ketoprofen, dexketoprofen, and naproxen have gained most acceptance. Combination therapy with other analgesics or adjuvants is largely accepted.

Efficacy of two low-level laser therapy protocols following lower third molar surgery - a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial

The aim of this study was to test two low-level laser therapy protocols by evaluating pain control, swelling and trismus in the postoperative period of lower third molar surgeries. This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Patients presenting two symmetrically impacted mandibular third molars were included. One side was randomly assigned for LLLT applied immediately after surgery (T1) and then after 24 (T2) and 48 hours (T3) (Protocol A). The other side received LLLT applied immediately after surgery and placebo after 24 and 48 hours (Protocol B). LLLT was given by intraoral application (660nm, 5 J/cm2, 10 s, 20 mW, 4 points) followed by extraoral application (789 nm, 30 J/cm2, 20 s, 60 mW, 8 points). The placebo application was similar to that of the experimental side but with laser simulation. The primary outcomes were pain control, swelling and trismus intensity at T1, T2, T3 and 7 days after surgery (T4). Data were analyzedbyANOVArepeated measures and Wilcoxon test (p<.05). The final sample consisted of 21 patients (42 teeth). There were no statistical differences for pain level between protocols A and B over time (p= .909), although the amount of analgesic medication was lower with protocol A at T2 (p=.022). There were no differences in swelling (p=.958) or trismus (p=.837) between the protocols used over time. Both protocols performed similarly for pain control, swelling and trismus. Therefore, for practical reasons, a single laser application in the immediate postoperative period could be indicated for the management of postoperative discomfort in lower third molar surgery.

Analgesia and patient comfort after enhanced recovery after surgery in uvulopalatopharyngoplasty: a randomised controlled pilot study

Background

Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty(UPPP) is the most prevalent surgical treatment of obstructive sleep apnea, but postoperative pharyngeal pain may affect patient comfort. The enhanced recovery after surgery pathway has been proved beneficial to many types of surgery but not to UPPP yet. The aim of this pilot study was to preliminarily standrize an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for UPPP, to assess whether it has positive effects on reducing postoperative pharyngeal pain and improving patient comfort, and to test its feasibility for an international multicentre study.

Methods

This randomised controlled study analysed 116 patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) who were undergoing UPPP in a single tertiary care hospital. They were randomly divided according to treatment: the ERAS group (those who received ERAS treatment) and the control group (those who received traditional treatment). Ninety-five patients completed the assessment (ERAS group, 59 patients; control group, 36 patients). Pharyngeal pain and patient comfort were evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at 30 min and at 6, 12, 24 and 48 h after UPPP. Complications, hospitalisation duration, and hospital cost were recorded.

Results

The VAS scores for resting pain and swallowing pain were significantly lower in the ERAS group than those in the control group at 30 min and at 6, 12, 24 and 48 h after surgery. Patient comfort was improved in the ERAS group. The hospitalisation duration and cost were comparable between the groups. The incidence of complications showed an increasing trend in the ERAS group.

Conclusion

The ERAS protocol significantly relieved pharyngeal pain after UPPP and improved comfort in patients with OSA, which showed the prospect for an larger study. Meanwhile a potential increase of post-operative complications in the ERAS group should be noticed.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (23/09/2018, ChiCTR1800018537)

Comparing the Effect of Facial Compression Bandage to That of Systemic Dexamethasone on Postsurgical Sequels after Extraction of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Split-mouth Randomized Clinical Trial

AIM: The present study aimed to compare the clinical efficiency of facial pressure bandage, to that of intramuscular injection of dexamethasone (8 mg) on postsurgical sequels (swelling, pain, and trismus) of extraction of impacted mandibular third molar. METHODS: The study implemented a randomized split-mouth design. Patients with symmetrical bilateral impacted molars were eligible for the present trial. Sides were randomly assigned to two groups: pressure bandage group and dexamethasone group. The evaluated postsurgical sequels were extraoral swelling, trismus, and pain after 48 h and 7 days. RESULTS: The study included 42 impacted third molars (n = 42) in 21 patients with a mean age of 23.4 years. Most participants were females (66.7%). The mean postoperative swelling rates after 48 h and 7 days in pressure bandage group were found to be comparable to those of dexamethasone group. No significant difference was found in the mean rates of postoperative trismus between study groups after 48 h and 7 days. Differences in mean pain level scores between the pressure bandage group and dexamethasone group were statistically insignificant after 48 h and 7 days. CONCLUSION: The study findings showed that the effect of the pressure bandage was comparable to dexamethasone effect on the postsurgical sequels after surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars.