Comparison of the outcomes of partially erupted third mandibular molar surgical removal wound closure between the suture and sutureless techniques: a split-mouth design
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The objective of this study is to compare the outcomes between surgical removal of lower third molars in the suture and sutureless techniques. In this clinical trial with a split-mouth design, involved separate timing for assessments, conducted at two different points: 7 days and 6 months after surgery. During the initial 7-day period, 52 patients aged 14 to 39 years old, were included in the study. These patients were divided into two groups: the suture and the sutureless groups. All patients underwent surgical removal of impacted teeth by two oral and maxillofacial surgeons. During the second period over the next 6 months, 34 patients returned for evaluation. The focus was on assessing pocket depth and bone level at the distal area of the lower second molars using panoramic radiographs. The outcomes indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in pain and swelling scores on days 1, 3, and 7 after surgery, pocket depth and bone level in lower second molar next 6 months. There was no excessive bleeding after surgery in two groups. From this study, the surgical removal of partially erupted mandibular molars using a sutureless technique yielded outcomes that achieved with a suture technique. Additionally, the sutureless technique offered the advantage of reducing surgery time and eliminating the need for postoperative suture removal.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The opinions and content expressed in the articles are solely those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the journal or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy and correctness of their work.
Any reuse, reproduction, or redistribution of the articles, content, data, or images in other forms requires prior written permission from the Thai Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
References
Kaczor-Urbanowicz K, Zadurska M, Czochrowska E. Im- pacted teeth: an interdisciplinary perspective. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2016;25:575-85.
Aitasalo K, Lehtinen R, Oksala E. An orthopantomography study of prevalence of impacted teeth. Int J Oral Surg. 1972;1:117-20.
Kaomongkolgit R, Tantanapornkul W. Pattern of impacted third molars in Thai population: retrospective radio- graphic survey. J Int Dent Med Res. 2017;10:30-5.
Vigneswaran A, Shilpa S. The incidence of cysts and tu- mors associated with impacted third molars. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2015;7:253.
Miloro M, Ghali GE, Larsen P, Waite P, editors. Peterson’s principles of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 3rd ed. Shelton, CT: PMPH; 2012.
Passarelli PC, Lopez MA, Netti A, Rella E, Leonardis M, Svaluto Ferro L, et al. Effects of flap design on the peri odontal health of second lower molars after impacted third molar extraction. Healthcare (Basel). 2022;10:2410.
Marciani RD. Complications of third molar surgery and their management. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2012;20:233-51.
Hur Y, Ogata Y. Different flap designs have no impact on periodontal outcomes on second molars after impacted third-molar extraction. J Am Dent Assoc. 2017;148:849-52.
Pasqualini D, Cocero N, Castella A, Mela L, Bracco P. Primary and secondary closure of the surgical wound after removal of impacted mandibular third molars: a comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;34:52-7.
Koyuncu B, Zeytinoğlu M, Tetik A, Gomel MM. Effect of tube drainage compared with conventional suturing on post- operative discomfort after extraction of impacted man- dibular third molars. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53: 63-7.
Varvara G, Bernardi S, Cutilli T, Bianchi S, Sinjari B, Piattelli M. Anti-inflammatory steroid use in impacted third molar surgery: a systematic review. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2017;31:1095-9.
Waite PD, Cherala S. Surgical outcomes for suture-less surgery in 366 impacted third molar patients. J Oral Max illofac Surg. 2006;64:669-73.
Pathak HM, Kumari S, Prasad S, Singh N, Pathak P. Suture-Iess third molar surgery: review of 30 cases. Int J Sci Res Publ. 2013;3:1-5.
Fernandez HA, Reyes JMV, Sáenz AAR, Ocampo SZ. Com plications of 1028 sutureless inferior third molars surgeries. Dental and medical services of the Caribbean [cited 2024 Jan 20]. Available from: https://www.iaoms.org/IAOMS/assets/ File/NextGen Online Conference/Posters/Valdes Reyes.pdf
Hashemi HM, Beshkar M, Aghajani R. The effect of suture less wound closure on postoperative pain and swelling after impacted mandibular third molar surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;50:256-8.
Chaudhary M, Singh M, Singh S, Singh SP, Kaur G. Primary and secondary closure technique following removal of impacted mandibular third molars A comparative study. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2012;3:10-4.
Mahat A, Yadav R, Yadav A, Acharya P, Dongol A, Sagtani A, et al. A comparative study of the effect of sutureless versus multiple sutures technique on complications following third molar surgery in Nepalese subpopulation. Int Dent J. 2020;2020:1-6.
Osunde OD, Adebola RA, Saheeb BD. A comparative study of the effect of suture-less and multiple suture techniques on inflammatory complications following third molar surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41:1275-9.
Alkadi S, Stassen L. Effect of one-suture and sutureless techniques on postoperative healing after third molar sur gery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;77:703.e1-16.
Verma V, Tiwari R, Bhardwaj B, Singh X, Harsh A, Tak R. A comparative study of the effect of suture and suture-less techniques on post-operative complications following lower third molar surgery. J Med Sci Clin Res. 2018;6:194-9.
Swieboda P, Filip R, Prystupa A, Drozd M. Assessment of pain: types, mechanism and treatment. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2013;Spec no.1:2-7.
Cicciù M, Sortino F. Strategies used to inhibit postopera- tive swelling following removal of impacted lower third molar. Dent Res J. 2011;8:162.
Montero J, Mazzaglia G. Effect of removing an impacted mandibular third molar on the periodontal status of the mandibular second molar. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69:2691-7.
Rafetto LK, Synan W. Surgical management of third molars. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2012;20:197 223.
Zhang Y, Chen X, Zhou Z, Hao Y, Li H, Cheng Y, et al. Effects of impacted lower third molar extraction on periodontal tissue of the adjacent second molar. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2021;17:235-47.
Kugelberg CF, Ahlström U, Ericson S, Hugoson A, Thilander H. The influence of anatomical, pathophysiological and other factors on periodontal healing after impacted lower third molar surgery. A multiple regression analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 1991;18:37-43.
de Sousa Gomes P, Daugela P, Poskevicius L, Mariano L, Fernandes M. Molecular and cellular aspects of socket healing in the absence and presence of graft materials and autologous platelet concentrates: a focused review. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2019;10:e2.
Peterson L, Ellis E, Hupp JR, Tucker MR. Contemporary oral and maxillofacial surgery. St. Louis: CV Mosby; 1988.