BACKGROUND:Swelling, pain and trismus are undesirable consequences of impacted mandibular third-molar extraction. The authors conducted a study to evaluate the effectiveness of cryotherapy, the therapeutic use of cold, in reducing undesirable consequences after surgery. METHODS:Fourteen patients aged 20 to 28 years comprised the sample. The authors extracted two impacted mandibular third molars at different times from each patient. Immediately after surgery, the patient underwent cryotherapy on one side for 30 minutes every one and one-half hours for 48 hours when he or she was awake. The patient did not receive cryotherapy on the other side. The authors performed clinical examinations to measure trismus and swelling before surgery, immediately after surgery and 24 and 48 hours after surgery. RESULTS: The authors compared both sides for differences in swelling, pain and trismus in each patient. The results showed significant statistical differences in two of the five points that were used to measure the swelling (Wilcoxon nonparametric signed rank test of linear distances between the angle of the mandible to the pogonion and to the tragus). They found statistical differences between the two sides in relation to the pain; however, they found no significant differences in relation to trismus. CONCLUSIONS:Cryotherapy was effective in reducing swelling and pain in this sample. Despite playing no role in the reduction of trismus, cryotherapy was effective in reducing swelling and pain in this sample, and the authors still recommend it be used. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Cryotherapy is helpful after third-molar extraction. Further studies need to be conducted that use larger samples of patients and other types of therapy, such as low-level laser therapy.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Swelling, pain and trismus are undesirable consequences of impacted mandibular third-molar extraction. The authors conducted a study to evaluate the effectiveness of cryotherapy, the therapeutic use of cold, in reducing undesirable consequences after surgery. METHODS: Fourteen patients aged 20 to 28 years comprised the sample. The authors extracted two impacted mandibular third molars at different times from each patient. Immediately after surgery, the patient underwent cryotherapy on one side for 30 minutes every one and one-half hours for 48 hours when he or she was awake. The patient did not receive cryotherapy on the other side. The authors performed clinical examinations to measure trismus and swelling before surgery, immediately after surgery and 24 and 48 hours after surgery. RESULTS: The authors compared both sides for differences in swelling, pain and trismus in each patient. The results showed significant statistical differences in two of the five points that were used to measure the swelling (Wilcoxon nonparametric signed rank test of linear distances between the angle of the mandible to the pogonion and to the tragus). They found statistical differences between the two sides in relation to the pain; however, they found no significant differences in relation to trismus. CONCLUSIONS: Cryotherapy was effective in reducing swelling and pain in this sample. Despite playing no role in the reduction of trismus, cryotherapy was effective in reducing swelling and pain in this sample, and the authors still recommend it be used. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Cryotherapy is helpful after third-molar extraction. Further studies need to be conducted that use larger samples of patients and other types of therapy, such as low-level laser therapy.