Embedded teeth Mouth Diseases
Conditions
Interventions
The present research project will be conducted using an experimental model through a randomized, controlled, triple-blind clinical trial with a split-mouth design, involving 20 patients indicated for
Sponsors
Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
Eligibility
Age
18 Years to 40 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Be healthy, ASA I, according to the criteria of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA); both gender; be between 18 and 40 years old at the time of screening; require bilateral extraction of the lower third molars; have lower third molars with similar positioning and degree of extraction difficulty, and that are fully impacted; be non-smokers
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Pericoronitis in the region of the lower third molar; periodontal disease; absence of the lower second molar in any quadrant; allergy to any of the medications used in the study; pregnant or breastfeeding patients
Design outcomes
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 2: It was expected that the active oxygen gel would result in lower postoperative pain after mandibular third molar extraction when compared with 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel, assessed using the Visual Analog and Numeric Scale on postoperative days 1, 3, and 7.;Found outcome 2: Postoperative pain progressively decreased throughout the follow-up period in both groups, with no statistically significant difference between treatments on the evaluated days. A slight trend toward lower pain scores was observed in the active oxygen gel group during the early postoperative period.;Expected outcome 3: It was expected that the active oxygen gel would result in lower postoperative facial edema after mandibular third molar extraction when compared with 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel, assessed by linear facial measurements before surgery and on the seventh postoperative day.;Found outcome 3: Facial edema showed no statistically significant difference between the active oxygen gel and 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel groups, demonstrating similar postoperative evolution between treatments.;Expected outcome 4: It was expected that the active oxygen gel would be associated with a lower occurrence of trismus on the seventh postoperative day after mandibular third molar extraction when compared with 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel, assessed by maximum mouth opening measurement.;Found outcome 4: The occurrence of trismus on the seventh postoperative day was similar between the active oxygen gel and 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel groups, with no significant difference between treatments.;Expected outcome 5: It was expected that the active oxygen gel would reduce the need for postoperative analgesic use after mandibular third molar extraction when compared with 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel, assessed by recording paracetamol consumption during the seven postoperative days.;Found outcome 5: Paracetamol consumption was similar between the active ox | — |
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 1: It was expected that the active oxygen gel would promote better soft tissue healing on the seventh postoperative day after mandibular third molar extraction when compared with 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel, assessed using the Landry et al. healing index.;Found outcome 1: Soft tissue healing on the seventh postoperative day after mandibular third molar extraction was similar between the active oxygen gel and 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel groups, with no statistically significant difference between treatments, as assessed using the Landry et al. healing index (p = 0.5385). | — |
Countries
BR
Contacts
Public ContactEduardo Falcão
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
Outcome results
None listed