Comparison Between the Lingually Based and the Buccally Based Triangular Flap Design in the Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars (Randomized Split Mouth Clinical Trial)
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- Enrollment
- 20
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Postoperative Pain using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)
Study Overview
Brief Summary
The primary objective of this study was to compare between the lingually based triangular flap with the buccally based triangular flap in the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars.
Detailed Description
Many flap designs used for impacted third molar surgery do not place the mucoperosteal incision on sound bone, as they involve incisions that are placed on the extraction socket resulting in higher incidence of mucosal dehiscence, followed by secondary wound healing
This study involved 20 patient with bilaterally mesially angulated impacted third molar (class II position B). One side was surgically removed using the lingually based triangular flap and the other side was surgically removed using the bucally based triangular flap
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Crossover
- Primary Purpose
- Treatment
- Masking
- Single (Participant)
Masking Description
This study was a single blinded trial, where the participants did not know the technique used in each side.
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 21 Years to 30 Years (Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •Presence of impacted third molar that is misally angulated and retained in bone (class II position B).
Exclusion Criteria
- •Patients with a history of systemic disease (diabetes, renal failure, immunocompromised patients, cardiac patients and patients taking radiotherapy or chemotherapy )
- •Compromised dental and periodontal status
- •Heavy Smoking.
- •Pregnancy or lactation
Arms & Interventions
Lingually based triangular flap
Intervention: Lingually based triangular flap (Procedure)
Buccally based triangular flap
Intervention: Buccally based triangular flap (Procedure)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Postoperative Pain using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)
Time Frame: 7 days
Pain was assessed through on a 10-point Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). (0-1= None, 2-4= Mild, 5-7= Moderate, 8-10= Severe)
Postoperative Edema
Time Frame: 7 days
For the objective evaluation of swelling, five distances were measured * The distance from the mandibular angle to the lateral corner of the mouth * The distance from the mandibular angle to the nasal alar curvature * The distance from the mandibular angle to the lateral canthus of the eye * The distance from the tragus to the soft tissue pogonion * The distance from the tragus to the lateral corner f the mouth
Trismus Assessment
Time Frame: 7 days
Trismus was assessed by measuring the maximum inter-incisional opening (in millimeters) the distance between the incisal edge of the upper and lower central incisor using caliber.
Wound healing/ Presence of alveolar osteitis
Time Frame: 21 days
The presence of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) will be determined clinically using BLUM'S criteria. Wound healing was assessed and recorded depending on the absence or presence of dehiscence, every opening along the incision will be recorded as dehiscence , dental tweezers will be used to identify it.
Secondary Outcomes
No secondary outcomes reported
Investigators
Nourhan M.Aly
Instructor of Dental Public Health
University of Alexandria