Post-Operative Infections in Patients After Extraction of Impacted Third Molar by Different Flap Designs
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i7.2479Keywords:
Third molar extraction, post-operative infection, flap designAbstract
Introduction: One of the biggest worries for most surgeons doing impacted dental operations is post-surgery infection. This study's objective is to ascertain the prevalence of post-operative infections in patients having their impacted third molar removed using various flap designs and suturing techniques. The findings of this study will help surgeons choose flap designs and biomaterials more effectively, reducing the risk of infection and maybe speeding up the healing process for patients.
Study type: Descriptive, cross sectional study. Settings: Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Madinah Teaching Hospital, Faisalabad. Study duration: January 2025 to May 2025. Materials & Methods: Total 437 patients between the ages of 18 and 60 undergoing third molar extraction were included. Patients with severe medical conditions, women who were pregnant or nursing, smokers, and those using drugs that affect the healing of wounds after surgery were excluded. Oral and maxillofacial surgeons carried out the operations. An injection of local anesthesia was made. Blade number fifteen was used to raise the designated flap (envelope or triangular). Hemostasis was attained. After the tooth was fully extracted and thoroughly irrigated with 0.9% normal saline, the flap was sutured using the appropriate suture material (both absorbable and nonabsorbable). Postoperative instructions were provided, and a little gauze pack was applied to the area. On the seventh postoperative day, the suture was taken out, and a postoperative infection was observed (painful induration and purulent discharge at the surgical site). Results: Age range in this study was from 18 to 60 years with mean age of 36.95 ± 11.60 years. Majority of the patients 254 (58.12%) were between 18 to 40 years of age. Out of 437 patients, 79 (18.08%) were male and 358 (81.92%) were females with male to female ratio 1:4.5. Mean duration of surgery in our study was 27.88 ± 7.0 minutes. In our study, frequency of post-operative infections in patients undergoing removal of impacted third molar was found in 34 (7.78%) patients. Conclusion: This study found no statistically significant association between the presence of post-operative infection and any of the other risk factors, with the exception of flap design.
Downloads
References
1. Jaron A, Trybek G. The pattern of mandibular third molar impaction and assessment of surgery difficulty: a retrospective study of radiographs in East Baltic population. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18:6016.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18116016
2. Santana LG, Pereira TS, Fernandes IB, de Souza MMG, Paiva SM, Ramos-Jorge ML, et al. Impaction of mandibular third molars after orthodontic treatment by the edgewise method: a retrospective study. Braz Oral Res. 2020;34: e065.
https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0065
3. Alfadil L, Almajed E. Prevalence of impacted third molars and the reason for extraction in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Dent J. 2020;32(5):262-8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.01.002
4. Rodrigues EDR, Martins-de-Barros AV, Loureiro AMLC, Carvalho MdV, Vasconcelos B. Comparison of two suture techniques on the inflammatory signs after third molars extraction–A randomized clinical trial. PLoS ONE. 2023;18(6): e0286413.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286413
5. Kim JW, Seong TW, Cho S, Kim SJ. Randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of absorbable collagen sponge after extraction of impacted mandibular third molar: split-mouth design. BMC Oral Health. 2020; 20:1-9.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-1063-3
6. Abdilahi AM, Ashar A, Hassan J, Naqash A. Comparative study of two flap designs on postoperative sequelae after removal of impacted mandibular third molar. Pak J Med Health Sci.2022; 16(1):1517-20.
https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs221611517
7. Izquierdo Gómez KI, González Navarro B, García Ortiz de Zárate F, Arranz Obispo C, López López J. et al., The Importance of Flap Design in Third Molar Surgery: A systematic Review. Biomed J Sci & Tech Res 2018; 11(5): 8801-03.
https://doi.org/10.26717/bjstr.2018.11.002164
8. Farhadi F, Emamverdizadeh P, Hadilou M, Jalali P. Evaluation of Infection and Effective Factors in Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Surgeries: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int J Dentistry. 2022;2022:e 8934184.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8934184
9. Menon RK, Yan KL, Gopinath D, Botelho MG. Is there a need for postoperative antibiotics after third molar surgery? a 5-year retrospective study. J Investigative Clin Dentistr. 2019;10(4):e12460,
https://doi.org/10.1111/jicd.12460.
10. Kirnbauer B, Jakse N, Truschnegg A, Dzidic I, Mukaddam K, Payer M. Is Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in the case of routine surgical removal of the third molar still justified? a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial with a split-mouth design. Clin Oral Investigations. 2022;26(10):6409–21.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04597-5
11. Lodi G, Azzi L, Varoni EM. Antibiotics to prevent complications following tooth extractions. Cochrane Data Sys Rev. 2021;2(2):CD003811,
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003811.pub3.
12. Blatt S, Al-Nawas B. A systematic review of latest evidence for antibiotic prophylaxis and therapy in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Infection. 2019;47(4):519–55,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-019-01303-8.
13. Walsh LJ, Ford PJ, McGuire T, van Driel M, Hollingworth S. Trends in australian dental prescribing of antibiotics: 2005–2016. Australian Dental J. 2021;66(Suppl 1):S37–S41,
https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12846.
14. Naidu Sugnanam A, Post-operative complications for mandibular third molar extractions completed by undergraduates, postgraduates, general dentists and oral surgeons: a 2-year retrospective study (Griffith University: School of Medicine and Dentistry, Southport Campus Library, 2020).
15. Daly CG. Antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures. Australian Prescriber. 2017;40(5):184–8,
https://doi.org/10.18773/austprescr.2017.054.
16. Oliveira SV, Vellei RS, Heguedusch D, Domaneschi C, Costa C, de Barros Gallo C. Radiographic analysis of the management of tooth extractions in head and neck-irradiated patients: a case series. Imaging Sci Dentistr. 2021;51(3):323–28,
https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.20200333.
17. Bouloux GF, Steed MB, Perciaccante VJ. Complications of third molar surgery. Oral Maxillofacial Surg Clin North Am. 2007;19(1):117–28, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2006.11.013.
18. Chen C, Gilpin N, Walsh L. Discrepancy in therapeutic and prophylactic antibiotic prescribing in general dentists and maxillofacial specialists in Australia. Antibiotics (Basel). 2020;9(8):492, https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9080492.
19. Barbosa M, Prada-López I, Álvarez M, Amaral B, de los Angeles CDCM, Tomás I. “Post-tooth extraction bacteraemia: a randomized clinical trial on the efficacy of chlorhexidine prophylaxis. PLoS One. 2015:10(5):e0124249,
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124249.
20. Bitar MA, Doherty B, Egbert N. Does smoking cessation affect postoperative healing following oral surgery among smokers? a systematic review. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2024;82(3):367–75.
21. Park J, Tennant M, Walsh L, Kruger E. Is there a consensus on antibiotic usage for dental implant placement in healthy patients. Australian Dental J. 2018;63(1):25–33,
https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12535.
22. Camps-Font O, Sábado-Bundó H, Toledano-Serrabona J, Valmaseda-de-la-Rosa N, Figueiredo R, Valmaseda-Castellón E. antibiotic prophylaxis in the prevention of dry socket and surgical site infection after lower third molar extraction: a network meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2024;53(1):57–67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2023.08.001.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indus Journal of Bioscience Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
