scholarly journals Alveolar Preservation with Albumin and Gentamycin-Coated Allograft after Third Molar Tooth Removal: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 586
Author(s):  
Fanni Minya ◽  
Balint Trimmel ◽  
Laszlo Simonffy ◽  
Szabolcs Gyulai-Gaal ◽  
Zsombor Lacza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Third Molar ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Second Molar ◽  
Bone Level ◽  
One Year ◽  
Cbct Analysis ◽  
Pocket Formation ◽  
Tooth Removal

Alveolar preservation can minimize bone resorption after tooth removal and additional topical antibiotics might also be considered. The goal of this study was to observe alveolar preservation with albumin and gentamycin-coated allograft compared to unfilled control sockets after mandibular third molar removal. Twenty-two patients were involved, 11 in the control group and 11 in the test group. CBCT analysis and micromorphometric analysis were performed. After one year, graft integration was observed with remaining graft particles. Micromorphometric analysis showed increased density and lower trabeculae formation in the grafted group. The buccal height reduction of the alveolar ridge was significantly lower when alveolar preservation was applied (control: 2.54 ± 2.01 mm, graft: 1.37 ± 1.04 mm, p < 0.05). Horizontal bone loss prevention was not significant. At the distal site of the second molar, the marginal bone level (MBL) was significantly lower in the control group. At the control group, five pockets persisted from the eight initial and all healed in the graft group. Alveolar preservation improves bone formation, helps to preserve the buccal bone crest, and minimizes MBL loss and pocket formation on the adjacent teeth. Thus, it needs to be also considered after third molar surgical removal.

scholarly journals Third Molar Socket Grafting after Surgical Extraction to prevent Periodontal Pocket Formation

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-68
Author(s):  
Mohammed Jasim Aljuboori ◽  
Ng Ying Yi
Keyword(s):  
Third Molar ◽  
Gingival Recession ◽  
Periodontal Pocket ◽  
Radiographic Examination ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Second Molar ◽  
Bone Deficiency ◽  
Surgical Extraction ◽  
Rotational Flap ◽  
Pocket Formation

ABSTRACT There is an incidence of periodontal pocket formation and gingival recession on the distal of the lower second molar due to bone defect after third molar surgical removal. Patient referred suffering from recurrent pericoronities; after clinical and radiographic examination, the lower left 3rd molar is partially erupted and angulated in mesial direction. The radiograph shows there is bone deficiency on the distal of the adjacent 2nd molar. After 3rd molar surgical removal, cancellous bone graft placed on the socket with guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure and complete primary closure with rotational flap. Patient follow-up after 3 and 6 months, bone formation observed on the distal of 2nd molar with the absence of periodontal pocket. Third molar socket bone grafting with cancellous allograft may be a predictable procedure to prevent periodontal pocket on the distal of the second molar. How to cite this article Aljuboori MJ, Saini R, Yi NY. Third Molar Socket Grafting after Surgical Extraction to prevent Periodontal Pocket Formation. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2015;4(1):65-68.

scholarly journals Immediate Loading of Implant-Supported Single Crowns after Conventional and Ultrasonic Implant Site Preparation: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudio Stacchi ◽  
Teresa Lombardi ◽  
Domenico Baldi ◽  
Calogero Bugea ◽  
Antonio Rapani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Site Preparation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
One Year ◽  
And Control ◽  
Implant Site Preparation ◽  
Single Crowns

Aim. To compare implant survival rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) of immediately loaded single implants inserted by using ultrasonic implant site preparation (UISP) (test) and conventional rotary instrumentation (control). Methods. Two single implants were inserted for each patient: after randomization, test site was prepared by using an ultrasonic device (Piezosurgery Touch, Mectron, Italy) and control site was prepared by using the drills of the selected implant system (Premium AZT, Sweden & Martina, Italy), until reaching a final diameter of 3 mm in both groups. Identical implants (3.8x11.5 mm) were inserted in all sites at crestal level. Impressions were taken and screwed resin single crowns with platform-switched provisional abutments were delivered with 48 hours. Periapical radiographs were taken at provisional crown insertion (T0), 6 months (T1) and one year (T2) after prosthetic loading to measure MBL. All data were tested for normality and subsequently analyzed by paired samples t-test and forward multiple linear regression. Results. Forty-eight patients were treated in six centers with the insertion of ninety-six implants (48 test; 48 control). Four implants in four patients failed within the first six months of healing (two in test group; two in control group; no difference between groups). Forty patients (age 60.1±10.7 years; 22 female, 18 male) were included in the final analysis. Mean MBL after six months of loading was 1.39±1.03 mm in the test group and 1.42±1.16 mm in the control group (p>0.05) and after one year was 1.92±1.14 mm and 2.14±1.55 mm in test and control, respectively (p>0.05). Conclusions. No differences in survival rate and MBL were demonstrated between UISP and conventional site preparation with rotary instruments in immediately loaded dental implants: UISP, with its characteristics of enhanced surgical control and safety in proximity of delicate structures, may be used as a reliable alternative to the traditional drilling systems.

Effect of Preoperative Single Dose Dexamethasone Injection in Masseter Muscle on Postoperative Sequelae Following Lower Impacted Third Molar Surgery

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehrzad Moghadasi ◽  
Arash Golestaneh ◽  
Arash Ghodosi ◽  
Shayan Golestani
Keyword(s):  
Masseter Muscle ◽  
Third Molar ◽  
Control Group ◽  
P Value ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Third Molars ◽  
Bony Tissue ◽  
Oral Aperture ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Facial Swelling

Introduction: The surgical removal of impacted lower third molars involves trauma to soft and bony tissue and can result in pain, swelling and trismus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone, as a single 4 mg dose injected into the masseter muscle prior to extraction of impacted lower third molars on theses postoperative sequelae.   Materials & Methods: This prospective, randomized clinical research consisted of 43 healthy patients. The study group received 4 mg dexamethasone into the masseter muscle via intrabuccal approach immediately before starting the procedure while the control group received no corticoid. 7 days after surgery. Data were analyzed using t-test (α = 0.05).   Results: The patients administered dexamethasone showed superior results after surgery in terms of oral aperture, pain and all the facial swelling parameters, with statistically significant differences versus the controls (p value<0.001). Also there was statistically significant difference in terms of patients trismus between case and controlgroups (p value<0.001).   Conclusion: The results obtained showed that 4 mg of dexamethasone injected into the masseter muscle in the immediately before starting the procedure significantly reduces swelling, trism us and pain.  

scholarly journals Clinical and Radiological Evaluation of Marginal Bone Loss around Dental Implants Restored with Zirconium vis-à-vis Porcelain Fused to Metal: An In Vivo Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 08 (01) ◽  
pp. 17-21
Author(s):  
Udey Singh Wirring ◽  
Tarun Kalra ◽  
Manjit Kumar ◽  
Ajay Bansal ◽  
Aquib Javaid
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Radiographic Evaluation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Zirconia Crowns ◽  
Bone Level ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Introduction Marginal bone level is the criterion for implant success. Patient expectations for more natural looking implant restorations created the need to restore implants with more esthetically pleasing materials like Zirconia rather than conventional porcelain-fused to-metal (PFM) crowns. The aim of this study was to evaluate marginal bone loss around dental implants clinically and radiographically when restored with Zirconia and PFM prosthesis. Materials and Methods Two groups (control and test) were formed with 14 patients each. In the control group, the subjects were rehabilitated with PFM crowns and in the test group, the subjects were rehabilitated with Zirconia crowns. Rehabilitation was done after the healing period of 3 months. Radiographic evaluation was done at regular (baseline, 3rd, 6th, and 12th month) intervals. Results The results were statistically analyzed. Keeping in mind the limitations of the study, it was revealed that the difference in the crestal bone resorption in both the groups was not significant.

scholarly journals Retained Third Molars Removal in a Severely Resorbed Edentulous Mandible. A Case Report

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 532-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassio Edvard Sverzut ◽  
Alexandre Elias Trivellato ◽  
Alexander Tadeu Sverzut ◽  
Marcelo Rodrigues Azenha ◽  
Marco Aurélio Kenichi Yamaji ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Potential Problem ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Third Molar ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Third Molars ◽  
Edentulous Mandible ◽  
Mandibular Body ◽  
Mandibular Third Molars ◽  
Tooth Removal

The presence of asymptomatic third molars can represent a potential problem in the mandible when these teeth are retained and the patient has lost all normally erupted teeth. Once the mandibular first and second molars are removed, the mandibular body becomes weaker with time, increasing the complexity, morbidity and incidence of complication in the surgical procedure to remove the retained third molar. This paper reports a case where the mandibular third molars retained in a severely resorbed mandible were removed in a 54-year-old female patient. The treatment plan was based on the safe surgical removal of the teeth and prosthetic rehabilitation with an implant-supported milled bar overdenture and a bone-mucous-supported complete denture in the mandibular and maxillary arch, respectively. If the removal of a retained third molar is indicated in a severely resorbed edentulous mandible, the treatment plan must involve not only preventive measures in order to avoid mandible fracture during or after tooth removal, but also alternatives that allow an adequate mandibular rehabilitation.

Effects of surgical removal of mandibular third molar on the periodontium of the second molar

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
AJP Chaves ◽  
LR Nascimento ◽  
MEG Costa ◽  
M Franz-Montan ◽  
PA Oliveira-Júnior ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Third Molar ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Second Molar ◽  
Mandibular Third Molar

scholarly journals A preoperatív antibiotikus és antiszeptikus kezelés hatása a műtéti úton eltávolított alsó bölcsességfogak sebgyógyulására – prospektív randomizált vizsgálat

2017 ◽  
Vol 158 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
István Kaposvári ◽  
Kinga Körmöczi ◽  
Zsuzsa Beáta László ◽  
Ferenc Oberna ◽  
Ferenc Horváth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antibiotic Therapy ◽  
Third Molar ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Prophylactic Dose ◽  
Group I ◽  
Mandibular Third Molar ◽  
Amoxicillin Clavulanate ◽  
Group 2

Abstract: Introduction and aim: The study compares the antibiotic prophylaxis combined with postoperative antibiotic therapy to preoperative chlorhexidine rinse combined with postoperative antibiotic therapy in preventing complications after surgical removal of a mandibular third molar. Method: 71 healthy patients in four groups were enrolled in the study: I. prophylactic dose of 2000 mg of amoxicillin clavulanate, continued with amoxicillin clavulanate postoperatively; II. prophylactic dose of 600 mg of clindamycin, continued with clindamycin postoperatively; III. prophylactic chlorhexidin rinsing, continued randomized amoxicillin clavulanate or clindamycin postoperatively; IV. control, with clindamycin postoperatively. Results: The pain was smaller in the prophylaxis groups. Alveolitis occurred only in the control group: 2 patients. Wound opening occurred in 22,2 % in group IV., 14,2 % in group II, 10 % in group I., 5 % in group III. Conclusion: We consider completing the indicated postoperative antibiotic prescription with antibiotic or antiseptic prophylaxis. Chlorhexidin prophylaxis could have the same positive effect. Orv. Hetil., 2017, 158(1), 13–19.

scholarly journals Management of Unilateral Multiple Impacted Molars- An Interdisciplinary Approach of a Rare Clinical Case

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Gopalakrishnan ◽  
. Kamal ◽  
. Karthikeyan ◽  
V Keerthi Narayan ◽  
D Gomathy
Keyword(s):  
Third Molar ◽  
Mouth Opening ◽  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Graft Material ◽  
Therapeutic Approaches ◽  
Optimal Outcomes ◽  
Ceramic Crowns ◽  
One Year ◽  
Fixed Orthodontic Appliance

Impaction of first, second and third molars at once comprise a rare clinical scenario with diverse therapeutic approaches and possess a great challenge for the dentist. Early detection of the eruption disturbances helps to manage and produce optimal outcomes. Here, the authors reported a case of 17-year-old male patient who reported with the chief complaint of pain in his lower left back tooth region with difficulty in mouth opening and chewing that revealed impacted mandibular left first, second and third molar on radiographic investigation. A proper decision making is required to satisfy the patient and also get an effective result. As the patient had severe pain in the left side of the jaw near the angle of the mandible, surgical removal of the impacted molars was planned and performed using extra oral submandibular approach. Following the removal of the teeth, implants were placed in the extracted site supported by bone graft material and fixed orthodontic appliance therapy was carried out to correct the supra- erupted upper molars on the left side and arch expansion screw with upper Hawley’s appliance was given to expand the maxillary arch to aid in appropriate occlusion. Restoration of the implant was done after one year of orthodontic treatment using ceramic crowns. The combined surgical, orthodontic and periodontal interdisciplinary approach helped the patient to gain proper occlusion and satisfactory masticatory function.

scholarly journals “Importance of Plasma Rich Growth Factors In Tooth Socket-In Concern of DRY SOCKET” (A Comperative Study)

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (09) ◽  
pp. 5039-5043
Author(s):  
Dr santosh Mishra ◽  
Shukla M ◽  
Arya V
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factors ◽  
Healing Rate ◽  
Third Molar ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Dry Socket ◽  
Third Molar Extraction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Molar Extraction

Introduction: The high prevalence of dry socket or alveolar osteitis (AO) is of concern in surgical removal of third molars. The aim of the present study was to assess the preventive effect of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) on AO and also its effect on pain management and healing acceleration in third molar extraction sockets of high-risk patients. Materials and Methods: This split-mouth, double-blind clinical trial included 40 bilateral third molar extractions (80 sockets) with at least one identified risk factor for AO. PRGF was obtained from patient’s own blood, based on manufacturer’s instruction, and blindly placed in one of the two bilateral sockets (PRGF group; n = 20) of each patient. The contralateral socket was treated with a placebo (control group; n = 20). Samples were evaluated for AO and pain incidence on days 2, 3 and 4 and healing and infection on days 3 and 7. Data were analyzed in SPSS v16 using Wilcoxon test. Results: There was a significant difference in dry socket and pain incidence and healing rate between the two groups. Intensity of pain and occurrence of dry socket in the study group was lower than the controls. Also the healing rate was higher (P < 0.05) for the PRGF group. No sign of infection was seen in either group. Conclusion: The application of PRGF may significantly reduce the incidence of AO or its associated pain and may accelerate healing. The prophylactic use of PRGF following third molar extraction may be suggested especially in the patients at risk of AO.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document