Aim We aim to look at the differences between the standard Ward's incision and the comma-shaped incision and how they affect complications after surgery to remove an impacted mandibular third molar. Materials and methods Mandibular third molars had to be carefully extracted from a total of 40 patients who were randomly divided into two groups of 20 patients each. At first, patients were evaluated before surgery. In group A, a standard Ward's incision was made, and in group B, a comma incision was made to match the mucoperiosteal fold. Afterward, the impacted third molars were carefully removed. The evaluation criteria for pain, swelling, lockjaw, and healing of wounds were done before surgery, after three hours, and on the first, third, and seventh day after surgery. Result The pain scores that were recorded right after surgery, three hours later, and on days 1, 3, and 7 in the surgical area with comma-shaped incision were all lower than the pain scores that were recorded in the area where standard incisions were made. Enlarging was less with comma entry point than with standard Ward's incision. After surgery, there was a big difference between the two entry points in how the mouth opened and how the wounds were fixed. These findings showed that the comma incision is better than the standard Ward's incision when it comes to pain, enlargement, lockjaw, and healing of wounds. Conclusion The study results showed that the comma-shaped incision was better than the traditional method (Ward's incision) because there were fewer problems after surgery.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10008767 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.34799 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!