Abstract
Introduction
For reducing edema, trismus, and pain after impacted tooth surgery, some protocols are proposed but their relative effectiveness is controversial.
Purpose
The goal of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of corticosteroids and rubber drain on the postoperative complications of impacted molar surgery.
Patients and methods
This study was carried out on 22 patients with bilateral symmetrical mandibular impacted third molars. For surgical removal of impacted teeth on one side of these patients, either rubber drain (11 cases) or perioperative corticosteroids (11 cases) were used (study group). The contralateral impacted teeth were removed routinely without using any drug or drain (control group). Facial edema, trismus, and pain perception of the study and control groups were recorded on the second and seventh postoperative days.
Results and discussion
This study showed that perioperative steroids reduce the trismus, facial swelling, and the severity of pain after third molar surgery. This study also revealed that the use of the drain reduces facial pain and trismus but has no effect on the facial swelling after impacted tooth surgery. Comparing the steroid and drain groups, we found that perioperative corticosteroids are more effective than the surgical drain in reducing postoperative pain and edema, but their effects on trismus are similar.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amin MM, Laskin DM (1983) Prophylactic use of indomethacin for prevention of postsurgical complications after removal of impacted third molars. Oral Surg 55:448–451
Berine OR, Hollander BH (1986) The effect of methylprednisolone on pain trismus and swelling after removal of third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 61:134
Brabander EC, Cattaneo G (1988) The effect of surgical drain together with a secondary closure technique on postoperative trismus, swelling and pain after mandibular third molar surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 17:119–121
Caci F, Gluck GM (1976) Double-blind study of prednisolone and papase as inhibitors of complications after oral surgery. JADA 93:325–328
Dubois DD, Pizer ME, Chinnis RJ (1982) Comparison of primary and secondary closure techniques after removal of impacted mandibular third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 11:630–634
Edilby GI, Canniff JP (1982) A double-blind placebo-controlled trial of the effect of dexamethasone on postoperative swelling. J Dent Res 61:556
Esen E, Tasar F, Akhan O (1999) Determination of the antiinflammatory effects of methylprednisolone on the sequelae of third molar surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 57:1201–1206
Holland CS, Hindle MO (1984) The influence of closure or dressing of third molar sockets on post-operative swelling and pain. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 22:65–71
Huffman GG (1977) Use of methylprednisolone sodium succinate to reduce post-operative edema after removal of impacted third molars. J Oral Surg 35:198–199
Lineberg W (1965) The clinical evaluation of dexamethasone in oral surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 20:6
Messer EJ, Keller JJ (1975) The use of intraoral dexamethasone after extraction of mandibular third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 40:594–598
Montgomery MT, Hogg JP, Roberts DL et al (1990) The use of glucocorticosteroids to lessen the inflammatory sequelae following third molar surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 48:495
Neupert EA, Lee JW, Philput CB, Gordon JR (1992) Evaluation of dexamethasone for reduction of postsurgical sequelae of third molar removal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 50:1177–1182
Ordulu M, Aktas I, Yalcin S, Azak AN, Evlioglu G, Disci R, Emes Y (2006) Comparative study of the effect of tube drainage versus methylprednisolone after third molar surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 101:e96–e100
Peterson LJ, Ellis E, Hupp JR, Tucker MR (1998) Contemporary oral and maxillofacial surgery, 3rd edn. Mosby, St Louis, pp 215–248
Rakprasitkul S, Pairuchvej V (1997) Mandibular third molar surgery with primary closure and tube drain. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 26:187–190
Ross R, White CP (1958) Evaluation of hydrocortisone in prevention of postoperative complications after oral surgery. J Oral Surg 16:220–226
Saglam AA (2003) Effects of tube drain with primary closure technique on postoperative trismus and swelling after removal of fully impacted mandibular third molars. Quintessence Int 34:143–147
Schultze-Mosgau S, Schmelseizen R, Frölich JC, Schmele H (1995) Use of ibuprofen and methylprednisolone for the prevention of pain and swelling after removal of impacted third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 53:2–7
Sisk A, Bonnington GJ (1985) Evaluation of methylprednisolone and flurbiprofen for inhibition of postoperative inflammatory response. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 60:137
Suddhasthira T, Chaiwat S, Sattapongsda P (1991) The comparison study of primary and secondary closure technique after removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Thai J Oral Maxillofac Surg 5:67–73
Üstün Y, Erdoaˇn Ö, Esen E, Karslι ED (2003) Comparison of the effects of 2 doses of methylprednisolone on pain, swelling, and trismus after third molar surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 96:535–539
Ware WH, Campbell JC, Taylor RC (1963) Effect of a steroid on postoperative swelling and trismus. Dent Prog 3:116
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zandi, M. Comparison of corticosteroids and rubber drain for reduction of sequelae after third molar surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg 12, 29–33 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-008-0096-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-008-0096-6