The aim of this study is to evaluate the preemptive analgesic effects of dexamethasone (DEX) alone or combined with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in third molar surgeries. The subjects were divided into five groups (n = 20 teeth/group); subjects received only 8 mg of dexamethasone 1 h before the surgical procedure (DEX group), or in combination with etodolac (DEX + ETO), ketorolac (DEX + KET), ibuprofen (DEX + IBU), loxoprofen (DEX + LOX). Paracetamol 750 mg was provided as the number of rescue analgesics (NRA). Salivary PGE2 expression was measured preoperatively and at 48 h. Edema and Maximum mouth opening (MMO) were measured postoperatively at 48 h and 7 days. A visual analog scale (VAS) was performed postoperatively at 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 h, and 7 days. Salivary expression of PGE2 showed a decrease only for the DEX group. Edema and MMO and NRA consumption showed no significant differences among the groups (P > 0.05). The VAS showed a significantly lower pain perception at 6 h after the surgery for the DEX + ETO and DEX + KET groups (P < 0.05). The combination of DEX and NSAIDS should be considered for preemptive acute postsurgical pain management in third molar surgery. In some drug associations such as dexamethasone 8 mg + NSAIDS (ETO and KET) in the pre-operative time, only a few rescue analgesics are necessary.
(1) Background: Hypersensitivity reactions to metals may arise in predisposed patients chronically exposed to metallic materials, including dental implants made of titanium alloys. The purpose of this article was to systematically review titanium allergy manifestations in patients treated with dental implants and report a clinical case; (2) Methods: A systematic electronic search was performed for articles published in the English language until July 2021. The following eligibility criteria were adopted: (1) Population: individuals undergoing titanium and/or titanium alloy implant-supported rehabilitations; (2) Exposure: peri-implant soft tissue reactions attributable to implant insertion; (3) Outcome: evidence of titanium allergy, diagnostic methods, and forms of resolution; (3) Results: The included studies, in summary, presented evidence that titanium should not be considered an inert material, being able to trigger allergic reactions, and may be responsible for implant failure. A 55-year-old male patient received 3 implants in the posterior region of the left mandible and presented an epulis-like lesion developed from the peri-implant mucosa. The immunohistochemical analysis of the biopsy specimen confirmed the initial diagnosis of allergic reaction to titanium; (4) Conclusions: Although the evidence is weak, and titanium allergy has a low incidence, hypersensitivity reactions should not be underestimated. A rapid and conclusive diagnosis is mandatory to prevent further complications.
Objectives: to analyze the possible etiological factors associated with mandibular fractures occurring during tooth extractions. Methods the following data were collected: sex, age, the extracted tooth, tooth classification, angulation, level of bone impaction, pathological association, recognized technical errors, instruments used at the time of the fracture, and the surgeon’s experience and specialization, if applicable. An electronic search of the following databases was performed: PubMed/Medline, Lilacs, Embase, and Scopus. The data were tabulated and analyzed using the Chi-square test, a P-value less than 0.05 was considered significant. Results: a total of 80 cases were selected. Sex and age were not statistically significant (P>0.05). The teeth most associated with fractures were the mandibular third molars; however, the location was not significant. Pell & Gregory classes II, B, C, mesio-angular teeth, partial bone impaction, teeth related to pathological process, application of excessive strength, extractions with elevators, and non-specialists showed greater association with mandibular fractures during transoperative time (P<0.05).
Posterior mandible region is considered a highly predicable place for primary stability during dental implant placement. Although, this region can present a significant decrease in bone density, which can lead to implant dislocation during insertion. The present case reports an unusual dislocation of dental implant in a 59 old healthy patient's mandible and a secure solution for this kind of complication. During the drilling, bone quality type IV was observed. In sequence, implant was abruptly inserted in the perforation site and dropped into the bone marrow. Panoramic radiograph showed the implant inside bone marrow, close to mandibular base. The implant was removed through the surgical site. The screw of the implant prosthesis transfer was used to reach the displaced implant. A second implant with the same dimensions as the first one, differing by the external hexagon, was inserted into the same implant site. Therefore, the authors strongly recommend the use of the presented technique prior to osteotomy on mandibular body, reserving the second in the impossibility of reaching the internal connection of the displaced implant.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.