Analysing inflammatory responses after mandibular third molar extraction: a comparison of suture-less and multiple suture techniques.

IF 1.7 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Archana Sen, Vikas Dhupar, Francis Akkara
{"title":"Analysing inflammatory responses after mandibular third molar extraction: a comparison of suture-less and multiple suture techniques.","authors":"Archana Sen, Vikas Dhupar, Francis Akkara","doi":"10.1007/s10006-024-01287-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to compare the outcomes of suture-less and multiple suture closure methods on postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus, and associated complications.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This prospective, randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Goa Dental College & Hospital. Inclusion criteria encompassed subjects aged between 17 and 55 years, classified as American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) I, with asymptomatic impacted third molars falling within the moderately difficult impaction range (Pederson's difficulty index: 5-7). Study excluded individuals classified as ASA II, III, or IV, those with known or suspected allergies to the anaesthetic solution, immunocompromised patients, and individuals taking medications that could affect healing. Pregnant or lactating females and those with a history of bleeding disorders were also excluded. Wound closure methods were compared: Group A underwent primary closure with silk sutures, while Group B had suture-less closure. Subjects were allocated to the specific groups using a simple randomization method. This involved using a lottery-based random sequence to assign each participant to either Group A or Group B. Pain intensity, facial swelling, and trismus were key outcomes. Secondary outcomes included lingual nerve sensation and postoperative complications. Demographics factors, surgical details, radiographic and perioperative data, and physiological parameters were considered. Non-parametric tests and parametric test (repeated measure ANOVA) were employed. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 101 participants, both closure techniques exhibited similar outcomes in pain, swelling, and lingual nerve function. However, suture-less closure resulted in significantly less trismus and fewer cases of delayed wound healing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Suture-less method after surgical removal of third molar may reduce trismus compared to multiple sutures. While pain, swelling, and lingual nerve function management were comparable.</p>","PeriodicalId":47251,"journal":{"name":"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-024-01287-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to compare the outcomes of suture-less and multiple suture closure methods on postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus, and associated complications.

Materials and methods: This prospective, randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Goa Dental College & Hospital. Inclusion criteria encompassed subjects aged between 17 and 55 years, classified as American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) I, with asymptomatic impacted third molars falling within the moderately difficult impaction range (Pederson's difficulty index: 5-7). Study excluded individuals classified as ASA II, III, or IV, those with known or suspected allergies to the anaesthetic solution, immunocompromised patients, and individuals taking medications that could affect healing. Pregnant or lactating females and those with a history of bleeding disorders were also excluded. Wound closure methods were compared: Group A underwent primary closure with silk sutures, while Group B had suture-less closure. Subjects were allocated to the specific groups using a simple randomization method. This involved using a lottery-based random sequence to assign each participant to either Group A or Group B. Pain intensity, facial swelling, and trismus were key outcomes. Secondary outcomes included lingual nerve sensation and postoperative complications. Demographics factors, surgical details, radiographic and perioperative data, and physiological parameters were considered. Non-parametric tests and parametric test (repeated measure ANOVA) were employed. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.

Results: Among 101 participants, both closure techniques exhibited similar outcomes in pain, swelling, and lingual nerve function. However, suture-less closure resulted in significantly less trismus and fewer cases of delayed wound healing.

Conclusions: Suture-less method after surgical removal of third molar may reduce trismus compared to multiple sutures. While pain, swelling, and lingual nerve function management were comparable.

分析下颌第三磨牙拔除术后的炎症反应:无缝合和多缝合技术的比较。
目的:本研究旨在比较无缝线和多缝线闭合方法对术后疼痛、肿胀和践踏以及相关并发症的影响:这项前瞻性随机临床试验在果阿牙科学院和医院口腔颌面外科进行。纳入标准包括年龄在 17 至 55 岁之间、被归类为美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)I 级、无症状的第三磨牙撞击属于中度困难撞击范围(佩德森困难指数:5-7)的受试者。研究排除了 ASA II、III 或 IV 级患者、已知或怀疑对麻醉溶液过敏的患者、免疫力低下的患者以及服用可能影响愈合的药物的患者。怀孕或哺乳期女性以及有出血性疾病史的患者也被排除在外。对伤口闭合方法进行了比较:A 组采用丝线缝合,B 组采用无缝线缝合。受试者通过简单的随机方法分配到特定组别。主要结果包括疼痛强度、面部肿胀和三趾畸形。次要结果包括舌神经感觉和术后并发症。研究还考虑了人口统计学因素、手术细节、放射学和围手术期数据以及生理参数。采用了非参数检验和参数检验(重复测量方差分析)。统计显著性设定为 P 结果:在 101 名参与者中,两种闭合技术在疼痛、肿胀和舌神经功能方面的结果相似。然而,无缝线闭合术明显减少了咀嚼功能障碍,也减少了伤口延迟愈合的情况:结论:与多次缝合相比,手术拔除第三磨牙后的无缝合方法可减少三联症。结论:与多重缝合法相比,无缝合法可减少第三磨牙拔除术后的三联症,而疼痛、肿胀和舌神经功能的处理则不相上下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
118
期刊介绍: Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery founded as Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie is a peer-reviewed online journal. It is designed for clinicians as well as researchers.The quarterly journal offers comprehensive coverage of new techniques, important developments and innovative ideas in oral and maxillofacial surgery and interdisciplinary aspects of cranial, facial and oral diseases and their management. The journal publishes papers of the highest scientific merit and widest possible scope on work in oral and maxillofacial surgery as well as supporting specialties. Practice-oriented articles help improve the methods used in oral and maxillofacial surgery.Every aspect of oral and maxillofacial surgery is fully covered through a range of invited review articles, clinical and research articles, technical notes, abstracts, and case reports. Specific topics are: aesthetic facial surgery, clinical pathology, computer-assisted surgery, congenital and craniofacial deformities, dentoalveolar surgery, head and neck oncology, implant dentistry, oral medicine, orthognathic surgery, reconstructive surgery, skull base surgery, TMJ and trauma.Time-limited reviewing and electronic processing allow to publish articles as fast as possible. Accepted articles are rapidly accessible online.Clinical studies submitted for publication have to include a declaration that they have been approved by an ethical committee according to the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki 1964 (last amendment during the 52nd World Medical Association General Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, October 2000). Experimental animal studies have to be carried out according to the principles of laboratory animal care (NIH publication No 86-23, revised 1985).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信