Single-Suture versus Multiple-Suture Techniques Regarding Postoperative Pain, Trismus, Edema, Ecchymosis, and Operative Time in Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Wisdom Teeth: A Clinical Trial.

Mohammad Mehdizadeh, Abolfazl Karkoubzadeh
{"title":"Single-Suture versus Multiple-Suture Techniques Regarding Postoperative Pain, Trismus, Edema, Ecchymosis, and Operative Time in Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Wisdom Teeth: A Clinical Trial.","authors":"Mohammad Mehdizadeh, Abolfazl Karkoubzadeh","doi":"10.30476/dentjods.2024.102038.2332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgical removal of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth may be associated with postoperative complications such as infection, bleeding, edema, pain, ecchymosis and trismus. It seems that the number of sutures and the duration of surgery for impacted wisdom teeth are among the factors affecting the aforementioned complications.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare single-suture versus multiple-suture techniques regarding postoperative pain, trismus, edema, ecchymosis, and operating time in surgical removal of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth by envelope flap surgery.</p><p><strong>Materials and method: </strong>This double-blind split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 30 patients requiring bilateral surgical extraction of impacted wisdom teeth with the same level of impaction through an envelope flap. In each patient, wisdom teeth of one randomly selected quadrant was extracted through an envelope flap and single-suture technique (experimental group) while the wisdom teeth of the other quadrant was extracted through an envelope flap by multiple-suture technique (control group). The two groups were compared regarding operative time, and also pain score, trismus (mouth opening), edema, and ecchymosis at 1, 3 and 7 days postoperatively using paired t-test (alpha= 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The two groups had no significant difference in pain score, edema, and ecchymosis at any time point (<i>p</i>> 0.05). The operative time (<i>p</i>= 0.005) was significantly longer, and mouth opening at 1, 3 and 7 days postoperatively (<i>p</i>< 0.05) was significantly smaller in the multiple-suture group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the present study, postoperative trismus was significantly lower in the single-suture group than multiple-suture group, and the multiple-suture group had significantly longer operative time. Thus, single-suture technique appears to be superior to multiple-suture technique, and may be suggested for surgical removal of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth.</p>","PeriodicalId":73702,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)","volume":"26 3","pages":"226-232"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12394734/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30476/dentjods.2024.102038.2332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Surgical removal of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth may be associated with postoperative complications such as infection, bleeding, edema, pain, ecchymosis and trismus. It seems that the number of sutures and the duration of surgery for impacted wisdom teeth are among the factors affecting the aforementioned complications.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare single-suture versus multiple-suture techniques regarding postoperative pain, trismus, edema, ecchymosis, and operating time in surgical removal of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth by envelope flap surgery.

Materials and method: This double-blind split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 30 patients requiring bilateral surgical extraction of impacted wisdom teeth with the same level of impaction through an envelope flap. In each patient, wisdom teeth of one randomly selected quadrant was extracted through an envelope flap and single-suture technique (experimental group) while the wisdom teeth of the other quadrant was extracted through an envelope flap by multiple-suture technique (control group). The two groups were compared regarding operative time, and also pain score, trismus (mouth opening), edema, and ecchymosis at 1, 3 and 7 days postoperatively using paired t-test (alpha= 0.05).

Results: The two groups had no significant difference in pain score, edema, and ecchymosis at any time point (p> 0.05). The operative time (p= 0.005) was significantly longer, and mouth opening at 1, 3 and 7 days postoperatively (p< 0.05) was significantly smaller in the multiple-suture group.

Conclusion: In the present study, postoperative trismus was significantly lower in the single-suture group than multiple-suture group, and the multiple-suture group had significantly longer operative time. Thus, single-suture technique appears to be superior to multiple-suture technique, and may be suggested for surgical removal of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth.

单缝线与多缝线技术对下颌阻生智齿手术切除术后疼痛、牙关、水肿、瘀斑和手术时间的影响:一项临床试验。
背景:下颌阻生智齿的手术切除可能伴有术后并发症,如感染、出血、水肿、疼痛、瘀斑和咬合。阻生智齿的缝合次数和手术时间似乎是影响上述并发症的因素之一。目的:本研究旨在比较单缝线和多缝线技术在包膜瓣手术切除下颌阻生智齿的术后疼痛、牙关、水肿、瘀斑和手术时间方面的差异。材料与方法:本双盲裂口随机对照临床试验对30例需要双侧手术拔除阻生智齿的患者进行研究。每例患者随机选择一象限的智齿通过包膜瓣和单缝线技术拔除(实验组),另一象限的智齿通过包膜瓣和多次缝线技术拔除(对照组)。采用配对t检验比较两组患者手术时间及术后1、3、7 d疼痛评分、牙关(开口)、水肿、瘀斑情况(α = 0.05)。结果:两组患者疼痛评分、水肿、瘀斑各时间点差异均无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。多次缝合组手术时间明显延长(p= 0.005),术后1、3、7 d的开口明显缩短(p< 0.05)。结论:本研究中,单次缝合组术后牙关明显低于多次缝合组,多次缝合组手术时间明显延长。因此,单缝线技术似乎优于多缝线技术,可能被建议用于手术切除下颌阻生智齿。
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信