Flap design and mandibular third molar surgery: a split mouth randomized clinical study

Baqain, Zaid H.; Al-Shafii, A.; Hamdan, Ahmad A.; Sawair, Faleh

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2012.02.011

Cited by 70 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These results were in agreement with those of many studies which had compared two flap design for the third molar extractions, which were done by Rosa et al, Quee et al, and Schofield et al, who also reported no differences in pocket depth which was related to flap designs [14]. Several literatures have shown an enhanced regrowth of the alveolar bone crest in young patients whose extracted third molars were in their developmental stages.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

To Compare Standard Incision and Comma Shaped Incision and Its Influence on Post–Operative Complications in Surgical Removal of Impacted Third Molars

Sarumathi²,

Veerabahu³

et al. 2013

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To compare standard incision and comma shaped incision and its influence on post operative complications in surgical removal of impacted third molar.Methods: This was a cross-over trial. Twenty subjects with bilateral impacted mandibular third molars were recruited for the study. A standard incision was made on one side of the lower jaw and a comma incision was made on the other side to reflect the mucoperiosteal flap, after which the common steps for removal of impacted third molars were followed. The postoperative parameters were recorded immediately on the post -operative days 1, 3 and 7 respectively. Results:The pain scores which were recorded on days 1, 3 and 7 in the surgical area with comma incisions were found to be significantly lower as compared to the pain scores in the area where standard incisions were made. Similarly, swelling was lesser with comma incisions than with standard incisions. There was a significant difference in mouth opening between the two incisions on day 1, but no significance was seen on days 3 and 7. All these findings showed significant statistical differences. Conclusion:The results of the study showed that the new incision design was preferable over the conventional method, considering the lesser degree of post-operative complications. The cross-over design of the study greatly enhanced its statistical power and validity. InTROduCTIOnThird molars are present in 90% of the population with 33% having at least one impacted third molar. Thus, surgical removal of impacted third molar is the most frequently performed procedure [1]. Impacted lower third molar extraction produces a series of side effects, which include pain, inflammation, and trismus [2].Flap design is one important factor which influences the severity of these complications [3]. Flap design is important, not only for allowing optimal visibility and access to the impacted tooth, but also for subsequent healing of the surgically created defect. With so many objectives, the actual design of a flap sometimes becomes a compromise between peri-and post-operative considerations [4].The aim of this study was to compare two different flap designs in extraction of impacted mandibular third molars, by assessing their post-operative complications. In this study, pain, swelling, mouth opening and pocket depth were selected as parameters for comparing the two flap designs. MATeRIAl And MeThOdSThis study was a hospital based, experimental study with a "cross-over" design, which was done on thirty patients. Patients with bilateral, completely impacted, mandibular third molars or partially erupted third molars, without any symptoms of pain or swelling, who had good oral hygiene, were included in the study. Dentistry SectionPatients who were on any medications, lady patients who were pregnant, patients with severe pericoronitis, patients with soft tissue impaction and patients who were medically compromised were excluded from study.Thirty patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study aft...

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

To Compare Standard Incision and Comma Shaped Incision and Its Influence on Post–Operative Complications in Surgical Removal of Impacted Third Molars

Sarumathi²,

Veerabahu³

et al. 2013

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Postoperative morbidity has important medical, legal, and economic implications. 7 Consequently, many surgical approaches have been tried to minimize these complications, such as the use of surgical drains, different wound closure techniques, and various flap designs. 2,6,[8][9][10][11] In oral surgical procedures, it is desirable to place the mucoperiosteal incision on sound bone.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of a new flap design with the routinely used triangular flap design in third molar surgery

Yolcu¹,

Açar²

2015

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The real loss of attachment was very slight: 0.16 mm of recovery in the buccal probing site; a loss of 0.51 mm on the distobuccal one; a gain of 0.53 mm in the disto-oral site ( Figure 5). The cases operated by means of flap A have recovered with no long-term complications, while two cases operated one by means of flap B and one by flap C showed a 0.5 mm gingival recession on the buccal face of the second molar (3). All the adverse reactions have occurred within six weeks from the surgical treatment, and each one had no serious significance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

The Flap Recovery on the Impacted Lower Third Molar Surgery Comparing 3 Different Flap Designs: A Clinical Study

Ottria

Luciani

Piva

et al. 2017

ORL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYAim. The purpose of the study was to analyze the healing of the deep and superficial lower first and second molars periodontium, after the surgical extraction of the contiguous impacted third molar, comparing 3 mucoperiosteal flap designs. Materials and methods. 150 patients which had to undergo a impacted lower third molar surgery were enrolled in this study. They were checked from day 0 to day 90, in order to focus on the recovery quality of the soft tissues around the lower second molar, comparing 3 different flap designs. Results. No intraoperatory incident happened. The complete recovery of the periodontium around the second molar has been shown in each patient after 90 days from surgery and each adverse reaction happened within the sixth week after surgery. Only 2 slight gengival recessions 0,5 mm have been find out. Conclusions. The impacted third molar surgery is an operation that, if rightly programmed and performed, is relatively safe. Besides, the correct handling and management of periodontium around the second molar and the choice of the flap type to be used support a correct recovery on the second molar periodontium, avoiding any long-term damage. Clinical significance. This study wanted to analyze the healing of the deep and superficial lower second molar periodontium, after the impacted lower third molar surgery. In order to improve the surgical technique used for lower third molar germectomies, we wanted to compare 3 different kind of flap designs.

show abstract

Flap design and mandibular third molar surgery: a split mouth randomized clinical study

Cited by 70 publications

References 18 publications

To Compare Standard Incision and Comma Shaped Incision and Its Influence on Post–Operative Complications in Surgical Removal of Impacted Third Molars

To Compare Standard Incision and Comma Shaped Incision and Its Influence on Post–Operative Complications in Surgical Removal of Impacted Third Molars

Comparison of a new flap design with the routinely used triangular flap design in third molar surgery

The Flap Recovery on the Impacted Lower Third Molar Surgery Comparing 3 Different Flap Designs: A Clinical Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About