NAGIOS: RODERIC FUNCIONANDO

Double blind randomized clinical trial comparing minimally- invasive envelope flap and conventional envelope flap on impacted lower third molar surgery

Repositori DSpace/Manakin

IMPORTANT: Aquest repositori està en una versió antiga des del 3/12/2023. La nova instal.lació está en https://roderic.uv.es/

Double blind randomized clinical trial comparing minimally- invasive envelope flap and conventional envelope flap on impacted lower third molar surgery

dc.contributor.author	Costa, Samuel Macedo	es
dc.contributor.author	Ribeiro, Bruna Campos	es
dc.contributor.author	Gonçalves, Alice Soares	es
dc.contributor.author	Araújo, Laura Maria de Almeida	es
dc.contributor.author	de Toledo, Guilherme Lacerda	es
dc.contributor.author	Amaral, Márcio Bruno Figueiredo	es
dc.date.accessioned	2023-06-16T08:36:51Z
dc.date.available	2023-06-16T08:36:51Z
dc.date.issued	2022	es
dc.identifier.citation	Costa, SM., Ribeiro, BC., Gonçalves, AS., Araújo, LM., Toledo, GL., & Amaral, MB. (2022). Double blind randomized clinical trial comparing minimally- invasive envelope flap and conventional envelope flap on impacted lower third molar surgery. En Medicina Oral Patología Oral y Cirugia Bucal (pp. e518-e524). Medicina Oral, S.L. https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.25425	es
dc.identifier.uri	https://hdl.handle.net/10550/88157
dc.description.abstract	The latest trend in surgery is to look for minimally invasive procedures, with fewer complications and a shorter recovery time. This study aims to compare the minimally- invasive envelope flap, with smaller incision and fewer dissection and the conventional envelope flap, with a 20mm incision, on impacted mandibular third molar surgery, focusing on the hypothesis that there were no differences in postoperative outcomes. A double-blind randomized clinical trial was designed to compare both incisions, focused on determining the approach with minor postoperative side-effects and minor impact on quality-of-life. A total of 60 patients were enrolled for the study if their presented impacted mandibular third molar and was 18-years-old or more. Both groups were evaluated from time elapsed on the surgery, maximum mouth opening, swelling and quality of life assessment. The flap choice influenced facial swelling (p=0,03), pain on the first three days (p=0,037), interference with oral hygiene (p=0,019) and discomfort on speech (p=0,07). Chewing, swallowing, trismus, pain after seven days, postoperative complications and other quality-of-life arrangements were no different between groups. The minimally- invasive envelope flap could lead to a less painful experience for the patient, with fewer impact on the oral hygiene and speech discomfort.	es
dc.subject	xerostomia	es
dc.subject	quality of life	es
dc.subject	xerostomia questionnaire	es
dc.subject	transcultural validation	es
dc.subject	head and neck cancer	es
dc.subject	radiotherapy	es
dc.subject	saliva	es
dc.title	Double blind randomized clinical trial comparing minimally- invasive envelope flap and conventional envelope flap on impacted lower third molar surgery	es
dc.type	journal article	es_ES
dc.subject.unesco	UNESCO:CIENCIAS MÉDICAS	es
dc.identifier.doi	10.4317/medoral.25425	es
dc.type.hasVersion	VoR	es_ES
dc.identifier.url	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9648638/