Abstract :
Context: Surgical removal of the mandibular third molar is a routine procedure done in dental office. It is associated with various operative and post-operative complications.
Aims: The purpose of the prospective study was to compare the longitudinal and cross-sectional methods of in the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars and to evaluate the difference in duration of surgery and post-operative complications between the two techniques.
Settings and Design: This prospective study was conducted over a period of 18 months after institutional ethical clearance was obtained.
Materials and Methods: Fifty patients with impacted mandibular third molars were selected and treated with cross-sectional tooth sectioning (n= 25) and longitudinal tooth sectioning (n=25) by random allocation. Clinical parameters such as and post-operative maximal mouth opening, post-operative edema, time taken for the procedure to be completed and post-operative pain were used to compare and evaluate the outcomes of both the techniques in our study.
Statistical Analysis used: The significance of difference between qualitative variables and quantitative variables were assessed using chi square test and unpaired t test respectively.
Results: Longitudinal tooth sectioning consumed significantly less time than tooth cutting (P
Conclusions: In of impacted mandibular third molars, longitudinal sectioning of the tooth was associated with less incidence of edema and consumed less duration than cross-sectional .
Key Messages: Longitudinal tooth sectioning of impacted mandibular third molars provide better results compared to the cross-sectional tooth sectioning as it is relatively quick and yields favorable post-operative outcome, hence being adoptable by any dental practitioner for .
Keyword :
Impacted tooth, Postoperative complications, Tooth sectioning.