Evaluation of the Effects of Mefenamic Acid and Dexketoprofen on Postoperative Wisdom Dental Surgery
Evaluation of the Effects of Mefenamic Acid and Dexketoprofen on Postoperative Pain, Edema and Trismus in Impacted Wisdom Dental Surgery
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Van, Turkey, 65100
- Serap Keskin Tunc
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Volunteers with bilateral fully impacted mandibular wisdom teeth
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients were excluded from the study if they did not understand the clinical procedures of the study,
- Had allergies or intolerance to any of the substances used in the study,
- Patients on anticoagulant or psychiatric treatment,
- Pregnant or breastfeeding,
- Patients using oral contraceptiveswere,
- Diabetic,
- Patients with periodontal disease or active infection,
- Poor oral hygiene
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
- Masking: Triple
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Mefenamic acid was used to see post operative effects after extraction of 3rd molar in study group
In this study of 30 patients, 22 females and 8 males, 60 fully impacted lower wisdom teeth were extracted bilaterally and in the same position.
One of the bilaretal teeth of the patients was randomly selected and mefenamic acid was used as a drug to see post operative effects after extraction of impacted 3rd molars in the study group.
|
All surgical procedures were performed by the same surgeon using the standard surgical technique described below.
The anesthetic used was 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline.
In all patients, a sulcus incision was made in the lower second molar and an envelope incision in the third molar region, the mucoperiosteal flap was removed, and extraction was performed with a bone elevator and a third molar elevator.
If necessary, the impacted molar was incised with a high-speed dental handpiece and a fissure bur.
The wound was irrigated with copious amounts of saline, and the wound edges were carefully sutured with simple 4.0 silk braided non-absorbable sutures.
After extraction of impacted wisdom tooth, the patient was given mefenamic acid as a medication.
Other Names:
All surgical procedures were performed by the same surgeon using the standard surgical technique described below.
The anesthetic used was 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline.
In all patients, a sulcus incision was made in the lower second molar and an envelope incision in the third molar region, the mucoperiosteal flap was removed, and extraction was performed with a bone elevator and a third molar elevator.
If necessary, the impacted molar was incised with a high-speed dental handpiece and a fissure bur.
The wound was irrigated with copious amounts of saline, and the wound edges were carefully sutured with simple 4.0 silk braided non-absorbable sutures.
After extraction of impacted wisdom tooth, the patient was dexketoprofen as a medication.
Other Names:
|
|
Placebo Comparator: Dexketoprofen was used to see post operative effects after extraction of 3rd molar in control group
Bilateral impacted wisdom teeth of the patients were randomly selected.
After the tooth in the experimental group was extracted, the other impacted wisdom tooth was selected as the control group and dexketoprofen was used as a drug to see post operative effects.
|
All surgical procedures were performed by the same surgeon using the standard surgical technique described below.
The anesthetic used was 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline.
In all patients, a sulcus incision was made in the lower second molar and an envelope incision in the third molar region, the mucoperiosteal flap was removed, and extraction was performed with a bone elevator and a third molar elevator.
If necessary, the impacted molar was incised with a high-speed dental handpiece and a fissure bur.
The wound was irrigated with copious amounts of saline, and the wound edges were carefully sutured with simple 4.0 silk braided non-absorbable sutures.
After extraction of impacted wisdom tooth, the patient was given mefenamic acid as a medication.
Other Names:
All surgical procedures were performed by the same surgeon using the standard surgical technique described below.
The anesthetic used was 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline.
In all patients, a sulcus incision was made in the lower second molar and an envelope incision in the third molar region, the mucoperiosteal flap was removed, and extraction was performed with a bone elevator and a third molar elevator.
If necessary, the impacted molar was incised with a high-speed dental handpiece and a fissure bur.
The wound was irrigated with copious amounts of saline, and the wound edges were carefully sutured with simple 4.0 silk braided non-absorbable sutures.
After extraction of impacted wisdom tooth, the patient was dexketoprofen as a medication.
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Facial edema
Time Frame: 0-28 days
|
Measurement between facial craniometric points (angulus-tragus, angulus-lateral canthus, angulus-nasal base, angulus-lateral canthus, and angulus-pogonion).
The number of participants in the split mouth model was 22.
A total of 44 impacted teeth were extracted and edema was measured before and 1 week after each extraction.
|
0-28 days
|
|
Visual Analog Scale
Time Frame: 0-28 days
|
A numerical rating scale VAS was used for pain analysis (0=no pain, 10=most severe pain).
The pain levels at 24 hours, 48 hours and 1 week after the surgical procedure were recorded on the patient follow-up form by all patients who participated in the study by explaining that there was no pain at the "zero" level and the most severe pain known at the "10" level on the pain scale, which was organized as a 10 cm horizontal line on the prepared forms.
|
0-28 days
|
|
Mouth opening measurements
Time Frame: 0-28 days
|
The distance between the incisals of the patient's central teeth at maximal mouth opening.
|
0-28 days
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimated)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimated)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- YYU-09/15.12.2021
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.