Comparison of Two Different Doses of Dexamethasone to Control Swelling and Trismus following Mandibular Third Molar Surgery

Introduction: Third molar surgery is one of the most common procedures performed by dental surgeons in clinical practice, where postoperative sequelae like pain, trismus, and swelling are often encountered. Thus, in this study, we compared medications employed to reduce such complications. Objective: To compare the effect of two different doses (4 and 8 mg) of dexamethasone in the control of swelling and trismus after the surgical extraction of mandibular impacted third molars. Methods: An experimental study consisted of twenty-seven (27) healthy adult patients of both genders with bilateral impacted lower third molars, where surgical extraction was indicated, 4 mg and 8 mg of dexamethasone were given orally to the patients 1 hour before the surgical procedure at both the surgeries. The swelling was recorded by measuring the length of 3 facial planes using a measuring tape. Trismus was evaluated by measuring the maximum interincisal distance. Recording of facial swelling and maximum interincisal distance was done preoperatively and on the 1st and 2nd days postoperatively. Results: Based on statistical analysis (Independent T-test), the results showed a difference in the measurements of the degree of swelling and trismus of the treated sample. 8 mg of dexamethasone promoted a greater reduction of symptoms than 4mg of dexamethasone though there was no statistically significant (p-value >0.05) difference between the two doses. Conclusions: 8 milligrams of the dexamethasone had better effectiveness than 4 milligrams of the dexamethasone in reducing the degree of swelling and trismus. Keywords: Dexamethasone; impacted third molars; swelling; trismus.

The Effect of Oral Ketorolac Compared to Ibuprofen on Edema, Trismus, and Pain After Mandibular Third Molar Surgery

Background: Latent third molar extraction is the most common surgery in dentistry. Common complications of this surgery include pain, swelling, and trismus. To control these side effects, several drugs have been developed and evaluated in various studies. However, the present study is the first one to compare the effects of ibuprofen and ketorolac on pain, swelling, and trismus after molar surgery. Methods: This study was a split-mouth clinical trial. To conduct the trial, 20 candidates were selected from among patients referring to Surgery Department of the Dentistry School at Yazd Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences for mandibular third molar removal surgery. The patients were divided into two groups after the surgery: one group received ibuprofen, and the other one received ketorolac. Pain, swelling, and trismus were evaluated prior to the surgical procedure, 24 hours later, and one week after the surgery. Data were analyzed by SPSS software version 22 by using Wilcoxon statistical tests and paired t test. Results: Ibuprofen and ketorolac had similar effects on pain relief (P value>0.05). Studying the two groups produced similar results regarding improvement in mouth opening (P value>0.05). Improvement pace of the postoperative swelling was significantly faster in the group receiving ketorolac compared to the one receiving ibuprofen (P value <0.05). Conclusions: It was concluded that ibuprofen and ketorolac had positive and almost similar effects on pain control, edema, and trismus after molar surgery. However, ketorolac was more effective in controlling edema after surgery.

Comparison of the Postoperative Effects of Local Antibiotic versus Systemic Antibiotic with the Use of Platelet-Rich Fibrin on Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Surgery: A Randomized Split-Mouth Study

The surgery of the impacted mandibular third molar is the most frequent procedure in dentistry. The prescription of systemic antibiotics after the third molar extraction is widespread among dentists, but this is still argumentative. This study is aimed at evaluating the postoperative effects of local antibiotic mixed with platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and a postoperative systemic antibiotic prescribed for mandibular third molar surgery. The study included 75 patients divided into a control and 4 test groups ( n = 15 ). In the control group, only PRF was placed into the extracted socket, and no antibiotic was prescribed. In the first and third groups, PRF was applied to the socket; penicillin and clindamycin were prescribed as oral medications, respectively. In the second and fourth groups, only PRF combined with penicillin and clindamycin was applied into the socket, respectively. The outcome variables were pain, swelling, analgesic intake, and trismus. These variables were also assessed based on the first, second, third, and seventh days following the operation. Unpaired Student’s t -test and Mann–Whitney U test were used for analysis. There were significant differences in the total VAS pain scores between the control and group 3 ( p < 0.05 ), groups 1 and 2 ( p < 0.01 ), and group 4 ( p < 0.001 ) in ascending order. For analgesic intake, there was no significant difference for group 1 ( p > 0.05 ). However, there were statistical differences between the control group and groups 2 and 3 ( p < 0.01 ) and group 4 ( p < 0.001 ). Trismus and swelling did not differ among the groups ( p > 0.05 ). This study showed that the effects of local and systemic antibiotics with the use of PRF reduced postoperative outcomes. Moreover, local antibiotics with PRF may be a viable method to avoid the possible side effects of systemic antibiotics.

Comparative efficacy and safety of different corticosteroids to reduce inflammatory complications after mandibular third molar surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol

Review question / Objective: This systematic review aims to compare the effects of different corticosteroids to reduce postoperative inflammatory complications (pain, edema, and trismus) after mandibular third molar surgery by applying a frequentist network meta-analysis approach. To this end, the proposed study will answer the following questions: 1) Among diverse corticosteroids currently available, what is the best preoperative option to control postoperative inflammatory complications? 2) What is the optimal dose and route of administration of corticosteroids prior to mandibular third molar surgery to control the pain, edema, and trismus induced by the surgery? Condition being studied: Inflammatory complications after mandibular third molar surgery (Pain, edema, and trismus).

Comparison of Submucosal With Intramuscular or Intravenous Administration of Dexamethasone for Third Molar Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: The study aimed to review evidence on the efficacy of submucosal (SM) administration vs. intravenous (IV) or intramuscular (IM) route of injections of dexamethasone for improving outcomes after mandibular third molar surgery.Methods: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to 20th May 2021. Early (2–3 days) and late (7 days) outcomes were compared between SM vs. IV or IM dexamethasone. Quality of evidence was assessed based on GRADE.Results: Thirteen trials were included in the systematic review and 10 in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis indicated a significant reduction in early pain with IV dexamethasone but no such difference for late pain compared to the SM group. There was no difference in early and late swelling scores between the SM and IV groups. Pooled analysis indicated no significant difference in early and late trismus between SM and IV groups. Comparing SM with IM dexamethasone, there was no significant difference in early and late pain scores. Swelling in the early and late postoperative periods was not significantly different between the two groups. There was no significant difference in early and late trismus between SM and IM groups. The quality of evidence was low for all outcomes.Conclusion: Low-quality evidence suggests that SM infiltration of dexamethasone results in similar outcomes as compared to IV or IM administration of the drug after third molar surgeries. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to corroborate the current conclusions.