Skip to content

A comparative study between Cryosurgery and Conventional Surgery in Oral Lesion Blister treatments A comparative study between cryosurgery and conventional surgery in oral mucoceles treatments

A comparative study between Cryosurgery and Conventional Surgery in Oral Mucoceles treatments

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
REBEC
Registry ID
RBR-64f7rct
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2020-12-29
Start date
2017-02-06
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-10-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

mucocele

Interventions

Patients were divided into two groups according to the treatment performed: Group 1, formed by seven integrated (7/17= 41%) lesion exeresis through surgical excision conventional and Group 2 - formed
b) local infiltration with 2% lidocaine, combined with epinephrine 1:100,000
d) mucosa incision right above the lesion with scalpel blade No.15
e) complete lesion exeresis along with the related salivary gland
f) simple 4-0 silk thread suture. The liquid nitrogen administration method chosen to perform the cryosurgery was an open system, by means of a spray. A liquid nitrogen container was used, equipped wi

Sponsors

Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Lead Sponsor
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Collaborator

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Patients of both sexes; with oral lesions clinically compatible with mucoceles; round well-circumscribed; bluish or transparent and with a history of local trauma

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients treated with antimicrobials; analgesics or anti-inflammatories; with a history of any type of oral surgery for less than thirty days or with symptomatic oral lesions of any nature

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Absence of local anesthesia; no bleeding;Presence of edema after cryosurgery

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
In group 1, where conventional surgery was performed, all patients (7/7 = 100%) underwent local anesthesia to perform the procedure. As well as they had a bleeding considered scarce in the trans-surgical period and needed sutures to close the post-surgical wound. In group 2, of patients who underwent cryosurgery, due to the advantage of the technique being painless, no patient (10/10 = 100%) required the use of local anesthesia. Still in this group, no patient presented bleeding and none required postoperative sutures. The percentages of pain level reported by the patients showed that there were no statistically significant differences between treatments p = 0.503. Accentuated edema in the immediate postoperative period was a complaint reported by all patients in the group treated with cryosurgery. The need for postoperative analgesic use in group 1 was recorded in 57.1% of patients, which comprises four patients and in group 2 only two (2/10 = 20%) patients needed to take postoperative analgesics, but this difference was not statistically significant p = 0.162. Trans or postoperative complications were not observed in any patient in the sample.;In group 1, where conventional surgery was performed, all patients (7/7 = 100%) underwent local anesthesia to perform the procedure. As well as they had a bleeding considered scarce in the trans-surgical period and needed sutures to close the post-surgical wound. In group 2, of patients who underwent cryosurgery, due to the advantage of the technique being painless, no patient (10/10 = 100%) required the use of local anesthesia. Still in this group, no patient presented bleeding and none required postoperative sutures. The percentages of pain level reported by the patients showed that there were no statistically significant differences between treatments p = 0.503. Accentuated edema in the immediate postoperative period was a complaint reported by all patients in the group treated with cryosurgery. The need for post

Countries

Brazil

Contacts

Public ContactCamila Carla Ximenes Oliveira

UFPE

dracamilaximenes@gmail.com+55-81-2126-8818

Outcome results

None listed

Source: REBEC (via WHO ICTRP)