Comparison of the Effects of Dexamethasone Administration on Postoperative Sequelae Before and After “Third Molar" Extraction Surgeries

Efficacy of Dexamethasone Injection at Different Sites on Postoperative Sequelae After Extracting Mandibular Impacted Third Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Dexamethasone, an efficacious anti-inflammatory agent, is widely used after tooth extraction. However, its optimal injection site is yet to be investigated.

PURPOSE

We compare the efficacy of dexamethasone injection at different sites on postoperative sequelae after extracting mandibular impacted third molars (MITMs).

STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, AND SAMPLE

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. Healthy adults with fully MITMs scheduled for extraction were included. Exclusion criteria were 1) patients with the systemic alteration that prevented the surgical procedure; 2) pregnancy, breastfeeding, and premenstrual period; 3) hypersensitivity to the drug under test; and 4) those who did not return for postoperative follow-up at 1, 3, and 7 days.

EXPOSURE VARIABLE

The subjects were randomized to 3 groups. An online randomization plan generator assigned each subject to a single treatment by randomly permuting blocks. Different sites for postoperative dexamethasone injections included the buccal side of the adjacent second molar and extraction sockets. Dexamethasone injection (4 mg) on the buccal side of the adjacent second molar (group 1), an injection on the buccal side of extraction sockets (group 2), and an injection of physiological saline (0.8 mL) on the buccal side of the adjacent second molar (control).

MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES

The outcome variables were postoperative facial swelling, limitation of the mouth opening, postoperative pain, and postoperative quality of life evaluation. The pain was assessed using a visual analog scale at 1, 3, and 7 days, postoperatively. The quality of life was recorded throughout the Posse scale at 7 days.

COVARIATES

The covariates are age, sex, length of operation, and type of impacted teeth and surgery.

ANALYSES

The statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance, repeated measures analysis of variance, χ2 test, or Fisher's exact tests with P values < .05 considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Our study included 58 participants with a mean age of 19.48 ± 3.31 years; group 1 (n = 24), group 2 (n = 20), and control group (n = 14). On day 3 postoperative, the swelling and trismus were significantly less in group 1 than in the other 2 groups (P < .05), and group 1 had an overall postoperative quality of life compared to other groups (P < .05). Unaffected speech function was present in 73.7% of patients in group 1, while 50% of patients in group 2 had affected speech function 3 days after the operation (P < .05). The "unable to open mouth" of the "Eating subscale" and "felt tingling" had statistical significance (P < .05).

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Dexamethasone injections on the buccal side of the adjacent second molar can be a viable option for treating facial swelling and limitation of mouth opening after total MITMs extraction.

Comparison of preemptive etoricoxib and dexamethasone in third molar surgery - a randomized controlled clinical trial of patient-reported and clinical outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To compare preemptive single-dose etoricoxib and dexamethasone on postoperative patient satisfaction (pPS) and clinical parameters following the impacted mandibular third molar (IMTM) extraction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A parallel-group, triple-blinded, controlled clinical study included a total of 90 patients (n = 30), randomized to receive: etoricoxib 90 mg, dexamethasone 4 mg, or no premedication (control group) 1 h before surgery. Paracetamol 500 mg was prescribed as rescue medication (RM). Check-ups were scheduled at 24 h, 48 h, and day 7 post-surgery. At each time point, pPS was assessed using the 5-point Likert scale. RM parameters, swelling, trismus, and the occurrence of adverse events were also recorded, and patients were instructed to rate the perceived pain on Visual Analogue Scale.

RESULTS

In all the follow-up periods, data indicated significantly higher pPS scores in the preemptive medication groups when compared to the control group (p < 0.05). Both regimens delayed the first RM intake when compared to controls. In the etoricoxib group, a significantly lower total RM consumption was observed (p < 0.05). Dexamethasone significantly decreased swelling at each check-up and increased mouth opening at day 7 after the surgery (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive etoricoxib and dexamethasone elevate pPS after IMTM surgery. Etoricoxib improves RM parameters, while dexamethasone ameliorates the patient's postoperative functional ability.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Preemptive etoricoxib and dexamethasone use may decrease patients' discomfort following the impacted mandibular third molar extraction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05791721. Date of Registration: 28/03/2023 (retrospectively registered).

Postoperative pain and edema control following different protocols of preemptive analgesia in the surgical removal of impacted third molars: A triple-blind parallel randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial

This randomized controlled clinical trial aimed to evaluate the preemptive effects of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, nimesulide or dexamethasone on postoperative pain and edema in the surgical removal of impacted third molars. Participants underwent bilateral surgeries at 2 different times and were randomly given the test drug or placebo (split-mouth). Postoperative pain, edema and rescue medication were evaluated at different times. Study power was >80% for the observed effect size in the crossover repeated measures design. Differences between test drug and placebo were the response variable. Generalized Estimation Equation models were adjusted for each outcome. Sample comprised 5 groups (n = 20 each). Ibuprofen and nimesulide showed higher overall effects on pain scores over time, with no differences between them (p = 0.557). Acetaminophen showed significantly lower overall effects in edema control over time, when compared to other test drugs, that showed similar effects. Lower quantity of rescue medication were also observed for ibuprofen and nimesulide, with no differences between them (p = 0.999). Ibuprofen and nimesulide showed beneficial overall preemptive effects. Hence, in the decision-making process for preemptive analgesia in impacted third molar surgeries, ibuprofen and nimesulide should be considered on a case-by-case basis as the drugs of choice.

Systemic Use of Arnica Montana for the Reduction of Postsurgical Sequels following Extraction of Impacted Mandibular 3rd Molars: A Pilot Study

Background

Postsurgical sequels (PSS) are a group of complications commonly encountered following invasive dental surgical procedures such as bone grafting procedures, external sinus grafting, and 3^rd molar extractions. These include pain, intraoral and extraoral bruising, and edema. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy of arnica montana (AM) in the management of PSS following extraction of impacted mandibular 3^rd molars. The investigators null hypothesis includes no significant role of AM in reducing PSS following dental extraction.

Materials and Methods

The investigators implemented a case-control pilot study enrolling twenty-three patients with impacted mandibular 3^rd molars. These patients were allocated to AM or control group. Baseline clinical measurements were collected and included: (1) length of the surgical procedure, (2) pain score, (3) maximum mouth opening, and (4) facial measurements to evaluate edema levels. Subjects in active group received systemic AM tablets following the manufacturer instructions. All study subjects were followed up on Days 2, 4, and 7. Data was analyzed for statistical significance.

Results

A total of 30 impacted mandibular 3^rd molars were extracted, in which 22 completed with AM. There were 16 females, and the average age was 26 years. On Day 2, subjects in the AM group reported significantly lower VAS compared to control group (3.09 ± 2.22 versus 4.75 ± 1.28). In addition, bleeding, extraoral bruising, edema, and decrease in maximum mouth opening were significantly less reported in the AM group.

Conclusions

This study describes the potential benefit of AM in reducing PSS following dental extractions.