Topical anesthetics are commonly used in oral & maxillofacial surgery to control pain in the oral cavity mucosa before local anesthetic injection. These anesthetic agents come in many forms, developed for different usages, to minimize adverse reactions, and for optimal anesthetic efficiency. Earlier studies have revealed that these agents may also limit the growth of microorganisms in the area of anesthetic application. Many topical anesthetic agents show different levels of antimicrobial activity against various bacterial strains and Candida. The dosage of local anesthetic agent used in some clinical preparations is too low to show a significant effect on microbial activity. Efficiency of antimicrobial activity depends on the local anesthetic agent's properties of diffusion within the bloodstream and binding efficiency with cytoplasmic membrane, which is followed by disruption of the bacterial cell membrane. The antimicrobial properties of these agents may extend their usage in patients to both control pain and infection. To develop the topical local anesthetic optimal usage and antimicrobial effect, a collaborating antiseptic agent may be used to benefit the local anesthetic. However, more research is required regarding minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of topical local anesthetic agents with drug interaction between anesthetics and antiseptic agents.

Hyaluronic acid (HA) has long been studied in diverse applications. It is a naturally occurring linear polysaccharide in a family of unbranched glycosaminoglycans, which consists of repeating di-saccharide units of N-acetyl-D-glucosamine and D-glucuronic acid. It is almost ubiquitous in humans and other vertebrates, where it participates in many key processes, including cell signaling, tissue regeneration, wound healing, morphogenesis, matrix organization, and pathobiology. HA is biocompatible, biodegradable, muco-adhesive, hygroscopic, and viscoelastic. These unique physico-chemical properties have been exploited for several medicinal purposes, including recent uses in the adjuvant treatment for chronic inflammatory disease and to reduce pain and accelerate healing after third molar intervention. This review focuses on the post-operative effect of HA after third molar intervention along with its various physio-chemical, biochemical, and pharmaco-therapeutic uses.

No abstract

Background The surgical removal of lower third molar is still the most common surgical procedure that is done in oral and maxillofacial surgery field and creates the predictable post-operative sequelae such as pain, swelling, stiffness and difficulty in mouth opening. The purpose of this study is to compare pre-operative dexamethasone injection into pterygomandibular space (PGS) and sublingual space (SLS) in lower third molar intervention of post-operative pain, swelling, and limited mouth opening. Methods This study is the split-mouth, randomized crossover clinical trial in 30 healthy patients (mean age 21 years). These patients had similar bilateral lower third molar impactions. The patients were randomly divided into two groups receiving either 8-mg dexamethasone injection into SLS or PGS with the 4-week washout period intervention. Clinical assessment of facial swelling and maximum mouth opening was performed before operation and on day 2 and day 7 after operation. The post-operative pain was also measured by patients’ response on pain visual analogue scale (VAS) on the first, second and third day after intervention. Results There is no significant difference between PGS group and SLS group in pain and swelling on the second and seventh day after operation. However, PGS group showed a greater degree of limited mouth opening than SLS group on the second day after operation. Conclusions This study showed that 8-mg dexamethasone injection into PGS or SLS was not different in reduction of pain, swelling, and limited mouth opening. This result suggests that dexamethasone injection into PGS or SLS is similarly effective.