Pachipulusu Pavan Kumar, S Manjula
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, J.S.S. Dental College & Hospital, Jagadguru Sri Shivarathreeshwara University, 570015, Mysuru, Karnataka, India.
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Sep;22(3):261-266. doi: 10.1007/s10006-018-0696-8. Epub 2018 May 23.
Aim of the study is to compare the primary and secondary healing after surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars, in terms of swelling, severity of pain, trismus, and periodontal healing between two types of closure.
A total of 60 patients, divided into two groups randomly: group A, with 30 patients in which primary closure was done; group B, with 30 patients in which secondary closure was done. A comparison between two groups was done in terms of postoperative pain, swelling, trismus at first, third, and seventh postoperative days, and periodontal healing near adjacent second molar after 6 months.
The swelling and pain in group A were greater than that in group B, with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). Mouth opening is greater in group B compared to group A. There is no significant difference in periodontal healing in between two groups after 6 months. Complication like alveolar osteitis was noted in 1 patient (3.3%) in group B.
We conclude that secondary closure was better than primary closure in terms of postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus. Irrespective of any closure technique, there is no difference in terms of periodontal healing.
本研究的目的是比较在两种缝合方式下，拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙后一期愈合和二期愈合在肿胀、疼痛程度、张口受限及牙周愈合方面的情况。
总共60例患者，随机分为两组：A组，30例患者行一期缝合；B组，30例患者行二期缝合。对两组患者术后疼痛、肿胀、术后第1天、第3天和第7天的张口受限情况以及6个月后相邻第二磨牙附近的牙周愈合情况进行比较。
A组的肿胀和疼痛程度大于B组，差异有统计学意义（p < 0.05）。B组的张口度大于A组。6个月后两组间牙周愈合情况无显著差异。B组有1例患者（3.3%）出现了牙槽骨炎等并发症。
我们得出结论，在术后疼痛、肿胀和张口受限方面，二期缝合优于一期缝合。无论采用何种缝合技术，牙周愈合情况无差异。
