Effect of Advanced Platelet-Rich Fibrin (A-PRF) on Postoperative Level of Pain and Swelling Following Third Molar Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain and swelling following third molar (M3) removal can be debilitating, and there is interest in using advanced platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF) to reduce their severity. PURPOSE: This study compared postoperative pain and swelling between A-PRF and gelatin dressing in extraction sockets following mandibular M3 removal. METHODS, SETTING, SAMPLE: This split-mouth, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial was completed at the Oral Surgery clinic of University of Otago between November 2020 and July 2021. Patients aged between 16 and 40 years with bilaterally impacted mandibular M3 of similar Pederson index difficulty and deemed to be American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I or II comprised the study sample. PREDICTOR/EXPOSURE/INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: The exposure variable was M3 socket management. One socket received A-PRF and 1 gelatin dressing, while the other received 2 gelatin dressings. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE(S): The outcome variables were postoperative pain and swelling over 7 days. Pain was measured using the visual analog scale (VAS), and swelling using stereophotogrammetry. COVARIATES: Demographic characteristics (gender, ethnicity, and age), dental anxiety, smoking status, Pederson index, and intraoperative surgical time were the covariates. ANALYSES: The two sides were compared using cross-tabulations and the McNemar test for categorical and paired t-tests for continuous variables. Statistical analysis used IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 28).The Alpha level was 0.05. RESULTS: 76 (87.3%) of 87 patients who met the eligibility criteria participated in the study, and 70 patients (65.7% female; age range 16-30 years) were included in the analysis. Mean visual analog scale scores showed no statistically significant difference between the A-PRF and control sides, being 29.6 (95% CI 23.9, 35.3) and 29.5 (95% CI 23.5, 35.5) on day 2, and falling to 12.6 (95% CI 8.7, 16.5) and 14.2 (95% CI 10.0, 18.4) by day 7. Likewise, mean peak facial swelling on day 2 was recorded as 6.3 cm3 (95% CI 4.9, 7.7) and 6.6 cm3 (95% CI 5.5, 7.7), and by day 7 they were 1.1 cm3 (95% CI 0.5, 1.7) and 1.0 cm3 (95% CI 0.3, 0.7) on the A-PRF and control sides, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A-PRF placement in M3 sockets did not reduce postoperative pain and swelling over gelatin dressing alone.

Do Platelet-Rich Concentrates Improve the Adverse Sequelae of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Removal?

BACKGROUND: Several measures have been implemented to minimize the side effects of impacted third molar (M3) removal including the use of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF). PURPOSE: This study compared the effects of three modifications of PRF (leukocyte-PRF [L-PRF], advanced-PRF [A-PRF], and advanced-PRF plus [A-PRF +]) on the side effects of impacted M3 removal. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, AND SAMPLE: This double-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Oral Surgery Department of Kashan University between September 2022 and May 2023 on patients undergoing mandibular impacted M3 removal. Exclusion criteria were age over 30, local inflammation and infection, medication usage, and systemic disease. INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: The independent variable was the PRF product grouped into four categories (control, L-PRF, A-PRF, and A-PRF+). Study subjects were randomly distributed among the four groups. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE(S): The main outcome variables were postoperative sequelae including measures of soft tissue healing, pain, analgesic use, alveolar osteitis, trismus, and swelling. Subjects were assessed at baseline and on days 1, 2, 3, and 7 postsurgery. COVARIATES: Age, sex, duration of surgery, and side of surgery were the covariates. ANALYSES: Changes at different time points were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance. Pairwise comparisons were performed if significant. P values ≤.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 64 subjects (16 per group). All three modifications of PRF yielded significantly better soft tissue healing index than the control group on days 2, 3, 7, and 14 postoperatively (P > .05). A-PRF and A-PRF + had significantly better healing index than L-PRF on the third day (P = .02, P = .01). All the study groups significantly reduced visual analog scale pain score than the control group on days 1, 2, and 3. A-PRF and A-PRF + had significantly lower visual analog scale scores than L-PRF on the second day (P = .003, P = .02). No significant difference was found in maximum mouth opening during follow-up sessions (P = .2). Study groups had less facial swelling on days 2 and 3 than the control group (P < .05). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: L-PRF, A-PRF, and A-PRF + can improve postoperative outcomes after M3 removal but may not impact trismus. A-PRF and A-PRF + may be more effective than L-PRF in promoting soft tissue healing and reducing pain. A-PRF and A-PRF + have comparable results.

Removal of Horizontally Impacted Mandibular Third Molars Using the Three-Piece or T-Shaped Tooth Sectioning Method.

BACKGROUND: The extraction of horizontally impacted mandibular third molars (HM3) can be a complicated surgery. Appropriate tooth sectioning methods can reduce the operation time and postoperative complications. PURPOSE: The current study compares operative time and postoperative pain between HM3 removed using the three-piece or T-shaped tooth sectioning techniques. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: A randomized single-blind prospective clinical trial on HM3 extraction was carried out between June and December 2022 in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Affiliated Stomatological Hospital, Southwest Medical University. Patients with local or systemic infection, poor oral hygiene, and systemic disease were excluded. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The predictor variable was the tooth sectioning method. The subjects were randomized to a three-piece or T-shaped group. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE(S): The primary outcome variables were the operative time and postoperative pain measured using a visual analog scale (VAS). The secondary outcome variables were the rates of primary bleeding, mouth opening reduction, swelling, patient satisfaction measured using a VAS, and quality of life measured using a postoperative symptom severity scale. COVARIATES: The covariates included age, sex, side and classification of HM3, and the relationship of HM3 to the inferior alveolar nerve canal. ANALYSES: The data were analyzed using the independent samples t-test, paired t-test, χ2, and rank sum test. A significance level set at P < .05. RESULTS: The sample included 60 patients in the three-piece group and 66 patients in the T-shaped group. The operative time of the three-piece group (14.73 ± 3.21 minutes) was shorter than that of the T-shaped group (19.25 ± 4.29 minutes) (P < .05). On days 3 and 7, VAS of pain were 2.24 ± 1.89 and 0.15 ± 0.40 in the three-piece group and 3.95 ± 2.44 and 0.48 ± 0.68 in the T-shaped group (P < .05). The VAS of patient satisfaction in the three-piece group (6.05 ± 1.29) was better than the T-shaped group (4.90 ± 1.05) on day 7 (P < .05). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The three-piece tooth sectioning for HM3 removal was associated with shorter duration, slighter postoperative symptoms, and higher patient satisfaction and may be considered as a recommended practice for dentists.

Mannitol Reduces Pain and Trismus After Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The removal of the lower third molar is a routine procedure in oral surgery, yet it often leads to postoperative side effects, particularly inflammation. Despite various interventions explored in prior studies, there is still a need for effective strategies, such as anti-inflammatory substances, to address postoperative side effects. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to answer the following clinical question: Does the local injection of 0.9 M mannitol reduce postoperative pain, trismus, and swelling in patients undergoing bilateral symmetrically impacted mandibular third molar extraction? STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: This prospective, single-blind, split-mouth study at Hamadan Dental School involved 30 patients with bilateral symmetrically impacted mandibular third molars. Inclusion criteria were: no current medication, no anesthesia allergies, bilateral symmetrically impacted mandibular third molars, non-smokers, and the absence of systemic diseases. Exclusion criteria were: poor oral hygiene, alcohol/cigarette use, drug consumption, diabetes, systemic/gastrointestinal disorders, infection at the surgical site, lack of patient cooperation, and mannitol/anesthetic allergy. PREDICTOR/EXPOSURE/INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: The predictor variable was therapeutic injection, and it was grouped into two categories, 0.9 M mannitol solution or distilled water. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE: The primary outcome variable was pain. Secondary outcomes are trismus, swelling, patient satisfaction, and analgesic consumption. COVARIATES: Covariates included demographic information and operative details. ANALYSES: Statistical analyses included repeated measures and paired t-tests with a significance level set at P < .05. RESULTS: The study comprised 30 participants (mean age: 22.6 ± 3.59 years; 6 men, 24 women). In the test group, pain intensity significantly decreased from 5.30 on surgery day to 0.00, with subsequent values of 2.97, 1.30, 0.40, 0.17, and 0.03. The control group also decreased from 7.68 to 0.00, with values of 4.73, 2.67, 0.97, 0.23, and 0.07. The difference was statistically significant (P < .001). No significant swelling differences at T1, T3, T5, and T7 (P > .05). The intervention group had improved maximum mouth opening at T1, T3, T5, and T7 (P = .011) compared to the control group. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Mannitol infiltration significantly reduces postoperative pain and trismus in impacted third molar surgery. This finding underscores the potential for improved patient comfort and recovery in this context.

Efficacy of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy for Pain Management After Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Surgery. A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain and swelling associated with the removal of the third molar (M3) adversely affect the patient's quality of life. PURPOSE: The study aims to measure pain reduction and analgesic use in patients treated with pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy following M3 removal and compares it to patients who did not receive PEMF. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: The single-center study was designed as a randomized, prospective, controlled, double-blinded trial on a sample of patients with impacted mandibular M3 ascertained by x-ray orthopantomography and computed tomography. PREDICTOR/EXPOSURE/INDEPENDENT VARIABLES: The predictor variable is postoperative pain management. It was assigned randomly to each subject who received either PEMF or standard therapy. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES: The pain was quantified using a 100 mm visual analog scale and the number of analgesics taken. Each subject kept a daily clinical diary for 7 days, recording the amount of pain using the visual analog scale and the number of analgesic tablets taken. COVARIATES: The study covariates were age, sex, tobacco use, and Pell and Gregory's classification of M3s. ANALYSES: Student's t test was used, placing the statistical significance for P value < .05. The primary planned analysis was a 2-group, continuity-corrected, χ2 test of equality of proportions. RESULTS: The study sample included 90 patients, 47 men and 43 women, with an average age of 32.43 ± 8.80 years. PEMF was statistically associated with improved pain reduction (2.08 vs 5.04 with a P value = .0002) and consumption of fewer analgesics than the control group (2.6 vs 5.8 with a P value = .0062). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The study's results attest to the effectiveness of PEMF therapy in pain control after M3 surgery.

Is Diclofenac Transbuccal Mucoadhesive Patch Superior to Oral Diclofenac for the Management of Postoperative Sequelae After Third Molar Surgery?

BACKGROUND: Pain, swelling, and trismus are the most common sequalae following the surgical removal of mandibular third molars. They pose significant challenges for clinicians, prompting the exploration of efficacious management approaches. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of transbuccal mucoadhesive patch of diclofenac sodium versus an oral tablet in controlling the aforesaid sequelae. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: A prospective split-mouth, single-blinded study was conducted in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at AMC Dental College and Hospital, Ahmedabad. The study sample included patients of either sex, aged 18 to 45 years, requiring surgical removal of bilaterally symmetrical mandibular third molars under local anesthesia. Patients who had consumed analgesics within 24 hours prior to the procedure were excluded. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The primary predictor variable was the route of administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. The study group received transbuccal mucoadhesive patches containing 20 mg diclofenac sodium, whereas the control group received oral tablets of 50 mg. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE: Postoperative pain, measured with visual analog scale, was the primary outcome variable, whereas swelling, mouth opening, onset of analgesic effect, and adverse events were assessed as secondary outcome variables. COVARIATES: Two categories of covariates were considered. First, demographic: age and gender. Second, perioperative: pattern of impaction. ANALYSES: Intergroup comparison was made using a paired sample t-test and an independent sample t-test, while intragroup differences were assessed with a one-way ANOVA and a paired t-test. P value ≤ .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Out of 146 patients screened initially, the final study sample included 37 subjects with a mean age of 26.08 ± 5.09 years (21 (56.75%) males and 16 (43.25%) females). The study group exhibited a significantly lower postoperative pain score compared to the control group on days 0, 1, 2, and 3 postoperatively (P ≤ .05). No statistically significant difference was observed in reduction of facial swelling and improvement in mouth opening on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd days postoperatively between both the groups (P ≥ .05). The mean onset of analgesia was statistically significant in the study group (19.96 ± 5.40 minutes) compared to the control group (52.56 ± 6.33 minutes) (P < .001). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Transbuccal mucoadhesive patch of diclofenac sodium offers effective pain control with quicker analgesia and fewer side effects compared to an oral tablet.

Efficacy of a single Nd:YAG laser dose in reducing pain after mandibular third molar extraction: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

The purpose is to explore the analgesic effect of a single Nd:YAG laser dose after mandibular third molar extraction. This was a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Subjects were enrolled according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and randomly divided into the experimental and control groups. In the experimental group, the wound was irradiated with the Nd:YAG laser (wavelength, 1064 nm; output power, 1.5 W; energy density, 45 J/cm2; and power density, 1.5/cm2, pulsed mode) immediately after mandibular third molar extraction for 120 s (30 s at each site). In the control group, the laser working tip was placed near the extraction site but not activated. The primary outcome was the visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores in both groups at 2, 4, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h and 7 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included wound healing scores and adverse reactions. The VAS score was significantly lower in the experimental group than in the control group at 2 and 4 h after surgery, while there was no significant difference in the VAS score between the two groups at 12, 24, or 48 h or 7 days after surgery. There were no significant differences in the wound healing scores between the two groups on postoperative day 7. No adverse reactions were observed in any of the laser-irradiated areas. A single Nd:YAG laser dose was effective in reducing pain at 2 and 4 h after mandibular third molar extraction. China Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000033870 (Registration Date: 2020-6-15).

Comparison of suture and sutureless techniques on postoperative complications after third molar surgery: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare, among patients undergoing third molar surgeries, whether the use or omission of sutures improves postoperative clinical parameters. METHOD: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials in humans. The steps of this review were conducted following the PRISMA protocol. The risk of bias assessment was performed using the revised Cochrane tool (RoB 2). The RevMan software was employed for meta-analyses, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. RESULT: A total of seven articles were included in the systematic review; however, only one article quantitatively measured bleeding, rendering meta-analysis for this outcome unfeasible. The group of patients in whom sutures were not used presented lower pain and edema on the first day (respectively: MD - 1.08; 95% CI - 1.35 to - 0.81; MD - 1.23; 95% CI - 2.34 to - 0.11) and second day (respectively: MD - 0.50; 95% CI - 0.83 to - 0.17; MD - 10.66; 95% CI - 1.16 to - 0.16) postoperatively, compared to the group where sutures were employed. The group of patients who received sutures exhibited increased trismus on the first day postoperatively (MD 1.04; 95% CI 0.67 to 1.41). CONCLUSION: The omission of postoperative sutures in third molar surgeries appears to favor pain and edema outcomes within the first 24 h after the procedure, as well as trismus within the same timeframe. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Despite the suture being the standard conduct in tooth extractions. The omission of sutures in third molar extractions may favor inflammatory outcomes of pain, edema, and trismus in the immediate postoperative period.

Use of platelet- and leukocyte-rich fibrin (L-PRF) as a healing agent in the postoperative period of third molar removal surgeries: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of L-PRF as a healing agent in the postoperative period of third molar extraction surgeries, as well as to investigate secondary effects, such as the reduction of pain, edema and other discomforts after the surgical intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The methodology adopted consisted of carrying out a systematic review of the literature, following the model outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The inclusion criteria were previously established according to a systematic review protocol approved by the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under number CRD42023484679. In order to carry out a comprehensive search, a search in five databases was carried out, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Embase. RESULTS: The search resulted in the selection of randomized controlled trials that conformed to the established criteria. Two authors independently screened the records and extracted the data. The assessment of bias was conducted according to the guidelines recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration, using version 2 of the Cochrane tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials (RoB 2). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that L-PRF stands out by providing direct benefits to healing, vascularization and tissue regeneration. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: L-PRF plays an important role in reducing postoperative pain, edema, the incidence of alveolar osteitis and infections after third molar removal surgery, compared to patients who did not undergo the use of L-PRF.

Can concentrated growth factor prevent postoperative complications of impacted third molar surgery? A split-mouth randomized double-blind trial.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of concentrated growth factor (CGF) on prevention of postoperative complications in the impacted third molar extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 25 healthy patients with symmetrical bilaterally impacted third molars (50 extraction sites) were enrolled in this split-mouth, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Third molar extractions were performed in both sites of the mandible at the same appointment. Randomization was performed using a coin toss to choose the test and control sites. CGF was placed in the extraction socket and the socket was sutured (test group), while the contralateral socket was only sutured (control group). Each patient acted as their own control. The primary outcome were pain assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) and facial swelling on the1st, 3rd and 7th postoperative days. The secondary outcomes were bone healing in extraction sockets through alveolar bone height (ABH) and alveolar bone density (ABD) evaluated by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) immediately after extraction and in the 3rd and 6th months. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (12 female, 13 male; mean age 29.17) with bilateral impacted third molars participated in the study. A statistically significant reduction in pain was determined on the 3rd and 7th postoperative days in the CGF sites compared to the control sites while no statistically significant difference was found between the groups on the 1st postoperative day (3rd day, p = 0.009; 7th day, p = 0.039). There were no statistically significant differences in facial swelling and bone healing between the test and control groups at different time intervals, although the data obtained were slightly favoring the CGF group (p > 0.05). There were no serious adverse effects such as infection, alveolitis, paraesthesia, fracture through the follow-up period in all of the cases. CONCLUSION: The study has demonstrated the effect of CGF on relieving the severity of pain after the third molar extraction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Placement of CGF in the extraction socket could relieve postoperative pain and reduce patient discomfort after the third molar extraction. CGF is recommended during the third molar extraction due to its good biological effects, low cost and simple preparation procedures. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300077819.

Clinical and thermographic evaluation after lower third molar extractions and the application of different photobiomodulation protocols: double-blind randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: to compare the parameters of pain, oedema, temperature, and soft tissue closure in dental sockets that received two different photobiomodulation (PBM) protocols following extractions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one participants had their teeth 38 and 48 extracted. Subsequently, one of the dental sockets received PBM at a wavelength (WL) of 808 nanometers (808 group- nm) and the other dental socket received the PBM at WLs of 808 nm and 660 nm, simultaneously (808 + 660 group). The PBM was applied immediately after the surgical procedure and on the 3rd and 7th days. RESULTS: The mean of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) values for pain were 1.45 for the 3rd day and 0.52 for the 7th day in the 808 + 660 and 808 group, respectively. The mean the pogonion-tragus measurement, used to assess facial oedema on the 3rd day, was 15.38 cm (range 13.5-17.5) in the 808 + 660 group and 15.48 cm (range 14.0-17.5) in the 808 group. The mean facial temperatures in the 808 + 660 group were 34.9 degrees Celsius (ºC) (range 33.5-36.4) on the 3rd day and 35 ºC (range 33.4-36.4) on the 7th day. In the 808 group, the mean temperatures were 34.9 ºC (range 33.9-36.2) on the 3rd day and 34.9 ºC (33.7-36.2) on the 7th day. Regarding the dimensions of the dental socket, the mean were similar for both groups. Significant differences between the groups were only observed in the pain parameter and only on the 7th day, being greater for the 808 + 660 group (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: The association of the 660 nm with 808 nm, and the increase in energy did not showed more benefits in pain reduction oedema, or acceleration of the closure of the soft tissues of the dental sockets of lower third molars, in the protocols used here. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There is no need to combine lasers at wavelengths of 660 and 808 nm to reduce oedema, pain and repair of soft tissues after extraction of lower third molars. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC) with the following code: RBR-66pyrh8, on 29th December, 2022.

Complementary and alternative therapies for managing postoperative pain after lower third molar surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of complementary and alternative treatments on postoperative pain following lower third molar surgeries. METHODS: A comprehensive search of Electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE via PubMed, and Cochrane Library) and grey literature was conducted up until May 2022. Randomized clinical trials investigating the effect of acupuncture, ozone therapy, laser (LLLT), drainage tube, kinesio-taping, ice therapy, and compressions on pain after LTM surgeries were included. The estimated mean differences (MD) for alternative therapies were pooled using the frequentist approach to random-model network meta-analysis NMA. RESULTS: Eighty-two papers were included in the qualitative analysis; 33 of them were included in the quantitative analyzes. NMA revealed that drainage tube and kinesio-taping were superior in controlling pain 24-hours postoperatively than no-treatment. At 48-hours follow-up, kinesio-taping and LLLT more effective than placebo and drainage tube; and kinesio-taping and LLLT were superior to no treatment. At 72 h postoperatively, ozone therapy was superior to placebo; and drainage tube, kinesio-taping, and LLLT were better than no treatment. At 7-days follow-up, ozone and LLLT were superior to placebo; and LLLT and kinesio-taping were superior to no treatment. The SUCRA-ranking placed drainage tube as top-ranking intervention at 48-hours (98.2%) and 72-hours (96%) follow-ups, and ozone (83.5%) at 7-days follow-up. CONCLUSION: The study findings suggest that these alternative and complementary therapies may be useful in reducing postoperative pain after LTM surgeries, and may offer advantages when combined to traditional pain management methods. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Non-pharmacological therapies are gaining popularity among healthcare professionals and patients. This study found that some of these therapies, specifically kinesio-taping and drainage tube were effective in controlling postoperative pain after third molar surgeries. These findings have important implications for clinical practice, as they highlight the potential benefits of incorporating these therapies into postoperative pain management plans.

Soft tissue inflammation around upper third molar cause limited mouth opening: common but overlooked.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore inflammation of soft tissue around the upper third molar as a prevalent cause of limited mouth opening, identify the clinical and radiographic features, and summarize the therapeutic effectiveness of tooth extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data from 264 patients with limited mouth opening over the last five years was performed. RESULTS: Among the 264 patients, 24 (9.1%) had inflammation of the soft tissue around the upper third molar, which was the second most common cause of limited mouth opening. Twenty-one of the twenty-four affected patients, with an average mouth opening of 19.1 ± 7.6 mm, underwent upper third molar extraction. Gingival tenderness around the upper third molar or maxillary tuberosity mucosa was a characteristic clinical manifestation (p < 0.05). The characteristic features on maxillofacial CT included soft tissue swelling around the upper third molar and gap narrowing between the maxillary nodules and the mandibular ascending branch. Post extraction, the average mouth opening increased to 31.4 ± 4.9 mm (p < 0.05), and follow-up CT demonstrated regression of the inflammatory soft tissue around the upper third molar. CONCLUSIONS: Inflammation of soft tissue around the upper third molar is a common cause of limited mouth opening. Symptoms of pain associated with the upper third molar and distinctive findings on enhanced maxillofacial CT scans are crucial for diagnosis. Upper third molar extraction yields favorable therapeutic outcomes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Inflammation of the soft tissue around the maxillary third molar commonly causes limited mouth opening, but this phenomenon has long been overlooked. Clarifying this etiology can reduce the number of misdiagnosed patients with restricted mouth opening and enable more efficient treatment for patients.

Optimal tooth sectioning using a surgical handpiece and elevator: a finite element study of horizontally deeply impacted mandibular third molars.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a finite element analysis of the impact of different variables on tooth sectioning efficiency and trauma to surrounding tissues when utilizing high-speed surgical handpieces and elevators. METHODS: CBCT data from the horizontally impacted third mandibular molar (M3M) of a patient were utilized to establish digital models of the M3M, adjacent M2M, and surrounding bone. To simulate tooth sectioning, a 3D finite element model was established with the following variables: remaining tooth tissue thickness (1-5 mm), tooth section fissure width (1-3 mm), elevator depth in fissure (2-6 mm), elevator position (buccal, lingual, central), elevator width (2-5 mm), and application of force (rotating, levering). Using this model, the distribution of stress on the M3M and the surrounding tissue was assessed while measuring tooth sectioning efficiency and trauma to the surrounding tissue. RESULTS: Factors associated with uniform stress at the site of sectioning included thin (≤ 3 mm) remaining tooth tissue, appropriate fissure width (~ 2 mm), a wide (≥ 4 mm) elevator, and central elevator positioning. Levering the elevator yielded greater stress on the M3M than rotating force. Greater sectioning efficiency was associated with increased stress placed on the distobuccal side of M2M. CONCLUSIONS: Tooth sectioning efficiency can be improved by adjusting the high-speed surgical handpiece and elevator. However, it is important to remain attentive to the trauma to which adjacent teeth are exposed during this process. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: These results offer guidance for approaches to improving operator efficiency and reducing trauma to surrounding tissues during tooth sectioning.

Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive versus silk sutures for mandibular third molar surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive has been presented as an alternative to sutures and several studies have compared them. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive on postoperative pain and swelling, following mandibular third molar surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Database search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed and Scopus, along with extensive search in the grey literature, including randomized and non-randomized clinical trials that applied cyanoacrylate adhesive for closing mandibular third molar surgical sites and compared it with silk sutures, assessing postoperative pain and swelling. The search ended on September 22, 2023. RESULTS: Of 886 identified articles, six were included and meta-analyzed. Applying cyanoacrylate demonstrated a reduction in the overall postoperative pain (SMD = -0.57, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.15, p = 0.009). A similar outcome was noted when pain was evaluated on the first and last postoperative days, based on controlled clinical trials (SMD = -0.47, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.03, p = 0.04), and randomized trials (SMD = -0.97, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.62, p < 0.00001). Patients/sides received cyanoacrylate showed a decrease in postoperative swelling (SMD = -0.26, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.01, p = 0.04). Following the GRADE rating system, the quality of evidence on pain and swelling was judged as moderate and low, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of cyanoacrylate adhesive may offer benefit in reducing postoperative pain and swelling following mandibular third molar surgery. Nevertheless, this should be further investigated, considering the low number of included reports. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The current results could help clinicians who perform this procedure to manage postoperative pain and swelling more effectively.

Comparing pre- and postoperative etoricoxib administration versus only postoperative on third molar extraction sequelae and oral health quality of life: a prospective quasi-experimental study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the impact of pre- and postoperative etoricoxib administration versus only postoperative on third molar extraction sequelae and oral health quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective quasi experimental study involved 56 patients, divided into a study group receiving preemptive etoricoxib 120 mg before surgery and postoperative etoricoxib 120 mg (n = 28), and a control group receiving preemptive placebo before surgery and postoperative etoricoxib 120 mg (n = 28). Follow-up assessments were conducted at 3- and 7-days post-surgery, recording swelling, trismus, and adverse events. Patients rated perceived pain using the visual analog scale (VAS) and completed an oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) questionnaire at specified intervals. Statistical analysis employed non-parametric tests (i.e., the Mann-Whitney test, Friedman test, and Wilcoxon sign test) with P < 0.05. RESULTS: Significantly lower VAS scores were reported in the study group throughout the follow-up period (P < 0.05). Pharmacological protocol did not have a significant impact on postoperative edema and trismus (P > 0.05). However, double etoricoxib intake significantly improved postoperative quality of life on day 3 after surgery (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pre- and postoperative etoricoxib 120 mg intake in third molar surgery reduced postoperative pain and enhanced postoperative quality of life on day 3 after surgery. Importantly, it was equally effective in managing swelling and trismus compared to exclusive postoperative intake. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Preemptive etoricoxib use may decrease patient discomfort following impacted mandibular third molar extraction.

Comprehensive analysis of bone tissue in extraction sockets of third molars after leukocyte and platelet rich fibrin and photobiomodulation applications.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare leukocyte and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and photobiomodulation (PBM) applications, which have been repeatedly reported to be superior to control groups, in terms of pain, soft tissue and bone healing in tooth extraction sockets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This double-blind, randomized clinical study was completed with 34 patients, who had an indication for extraction of their bilaterally impacted teeth. The right and left teeth of the patients were randomly divided into L-PRF and PBM groups. L-PRF group was treated with the blood product centrifuged for 12 min at 2700 rpm, and the PBM group was treated with a diode laser at different points for 60 s with a wavelength of 940 nm in repeated sessions. Postoperative pain was evaluated using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), soft tissue healing with Landry Index (LI), tissue healing in the distal region of mandibular second molar by probing depth measurement, and bone healing via panoramic x-ray using the Image J program. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found for any variable compared between the groups. CONCLUSION: L-PRF and PBM applications provide similar support in the healing of extraction sockets. Nevertheless, the advantages and disadvantages of both methods determine their usage areas. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: While L-PRF is advantageous in the early healing of extraction sockets, PBM may be preferred in terms of bone trabeculation in the long term.

Evaluation of the effects of pregabalin and dexamethasone coadministration on preemptive multimodal analgesia and anxiety in third molar surgeries: a triple-blind randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of pregabalin and dexamethasone coadministration in preemptive analgesia and anxiety control in lower third molar surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A triple-blind, split-mouth clinical trial conducted with patients divided into two groups: control group, receiving placebo and dexamethasone, and test group, receiving pregabalin and dexamethasone preoperatively. The evaluated variables were pain, measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), anxiety assessed through the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) questionnaires, hemodynamic parameters [Blood Pressure (BP), Heart Rate (HR), Oxygen Saturation (SpO2)], and sedation assessed by the Ramsay scale. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients were included. The test group exhibited a significant reduction in pain at 2,4,6,8,12,16,24, and 48 h after surgery and in the consumption of rescue analgesics. Anxiety, evaluated by STAI and VAS, showed a significant decrease in the test group (p < 0.001). Additionally, there was a significant decrease in BP at most of the assessed time points (p < 0.05) and a significant reduction in HR at two different time intervals (p = 0.003 and p = 0.009), indicating a positive effect in the test group. There was no significant difference in SpO2 between the groups. Sedation assessment revealed a significant difference at all time points favoring the test group (p < 0.05). There were no significant postoperative adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Pregabalin coadministered with dexamethasone demonstrated significant efficacy in controlling postoperative pain and anxiety, as well as a sedative effect. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The coadministration of pregabalin with dexamethasone may presents potential advantages in both pain modulation and psychological well-being of individuals undergoing third molar surgeries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC), No. RBR-378h6t6.

The Effects of a Cool Saline Solution Irrigation on Mandibular Third Molar Extraction Site: A Postoperative Split-Mouth Evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of sterile saline solution irrigation (lavage) performed after mandibular third molar extraction on postoperative complications, utilizing a split-mouth randomized clinical trial design. METHODS: Seventeen healthy participants requiring bilateral mandibular third molar extraction were enrolled in this single-center study. In each participant, one impacted third molar was designated as the experimental group and subjected to saline lavage at 4 °C. In contrast, the control group was the other impacted third molar, undergoing saline lavage at 25 °C. Various parameters, including postoperative pain, mouth opening, and facial swelling, were assessed using standardized measures and three-dimensional facial scanning at multiple time points. RESULTS: The average age of participants was 26.66 ± 4.1 years, with no postoperative complications observed in either group. The duration of surgery did not significantly differ between groups. Postoperative pain was significantly reduced in the experimental group during the immediate postoperative period compared with the control group, but this difference diminished over time. No significant differences were observed in mouth opening or facial swelling between groups at any time. CONCLUSION: In site 4 °C, sterile saline solution irrigation after mandibular third molar extraction may effectively reduce early postoperative complications, particularly pain, without prolonging surgical duration.

Using autogenous tooth sticky bone graft repair mandibular third molar dentigerous cyst osseous defects.

BACKGROUND: Dentigerous cyst are most common odontogenic cyst and they frequently occur at the mandibular third molar. Their asymptomatic long medical history always resulted in severe bone resorption at the distal aspect of the adjacent second molar. BonMaker® ATB demonstrate an excellent autogenous bone graft candidacy. The aim of this study is to share a single team's experience of dentigerous cyst osseous defect repairing by applying autogenous tooth sticky bone graft. METHOD: In total, 18 patients with dentigerous cyst, which was arised from mandibular third molar unilaterally, were enrolled in this study. Enucleation of dentigerous cyst was performed extracting with involving teeth under general anesthesia. Autogenous tooth sticky bone graft was prepared using extracted tooth and autogenous fibrin glue. Subsequently, grafting was performed above covering with concentrate growth factors. Patients were followed up at sixth months. RESULTS: They were eleven male and seven female patients. Their ages ranged from 20 to 40 years, with a mean of 31 years. Primary wound healing of all sites was achieved in all the patients. Sixth months postoperative radiographic assessment show that dentigerous cysts osseous defects of seventeen patients were good bone filling and ossification. One patient occurred slight bone resorption at the distal aspect of the adjacent second molar. CONCLUSION: Within the limitation of sample size and retrospective nature of the present study, autogenous tooth sticky bone graft demonstrates one of the best alternative alveolar bones repairing graft.