scholarly journals Clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of biocompound IMMUNEPOTENT CRP in the third-molar extraction

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 182-186
Author(s):  
Moises A. Franco-Molina ◽  
Edgar Mendoza-Gamboa ◽  
Erika E. Coronado-Cerda ◽  
Diana Zarate-Triviño ◽  
Juan E. Arizpe-Coronado ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
MC. de la Barrera-Nunez ◽  
RM. Yanez-Vico ◽  
A. Batista-Cruzado ◽  
JM. Heurtebise-Saavedra ◽  
R. Castillo-de Oyague ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. 1819-1826 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Victoria Olmedo-Gaya ◽  
Francisco J. Manzano-Moreno ◽  
Rafael Galvez-Mateos ◽  
Maria Paloma González-Rodriguez ◽  
Cristina Talero-Sevilla ◽  
...  

Homeopathy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glaciele Maria de Souza ◽  
Ighor Andrade Fernandes ◽  
Marcos Luciano Pimenta Pinheiro ◽  
Saulo Gabriel Moreira Falci

Abstract Background and Aim This preliminary study aimed to evaluate whether a homeopathic preparation (Traumeel S) might be a good option to control post-operative outcomes (pain, edema and trismus) associated with surgical removal of mandibular third molar teeth. The null hypothesis was that Traumeel S is not different from dexamethasone (gold standard) in controlling these post-operative inflammatory complications. Methods A randomized, “split-mouth”, triple-blind clinical trial was conducted. Seventeen healthy patients with a mean age of 20.94 ( ± 5.83) years had their lower asymptomatic bilateral third molars removed. Patients were randomized to receive Traumeel S or dexamethasone pre-operatively by injection into the masseter muscle; each patient acted as his/her own control. At 24, 48, 72 hours and 7 days after the surgery, the pain was evaluated according to a visual analog scale, edema through linear measurements of the face, and trismus through the maximum buccal opening. Wilcoxon statistics or paired t-test were used, and a significance level of 95% was adopted. Results For pain, the results for Traumeel S were not different (p > 0.05) from those of dexamethasone after 24 hours, 72 hours, and 7 days. For edema, the results for Traumeel S were not different (p > 0.05) from those of dexamethasone at all post-operative evaluations. For mouth opening, the results for Traumeel S were not different (p > 0.05) from those of dexamethasone at 72 hours and 7 days after third molar extraction. Conclusion With the exception of some early post-operative findings, the null hypothesis is not rejected. Traumeel S might be a good alternative approach to dexamethasone for controlling pain, edema and trismus after third molar removal.


Revista Dor ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 256-262
Author(s):  
Maylu Botta Hafner ◽  
Juliana Zanatta ◽  
Gustavo Sattolo Rolim ◽  
Antônio Bento Alves de Moraes ◽  
Angélica Maria Bicudo Zeferino

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document