Literature DB >> 27980326

Cone beam computed tomography in pre-surgical assessment of mandibular third molars.

Patrick A Fee1, Alison Wright2, Claudia Cunningham3.   

Abstract

DesignMulticentre, randomised controlled clinical trial.InterventionPatients referred for third molar removal received a digital panoramic radiograph(PR). Adults with one or more lower third molars in a close relationship with the mandibular canal were eligible for the study. Patients randomised to the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) group received a high resolution CBCT scan in addition to the PR. All lower third molar extractions were performed under local anaesthesia without sedation and without antibiotic prophylaxis. Information on variables such as experience of the surgeon, duration of surgery and technique for third molar removal were recorded.Outcome measureThe primary outcome measure was the number of patient-reported altered sensations one week after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the number of patients with an objective IAN injury; permanent IAN injury (>6 months); occurrence of other postoperative complications (wound infection, alveolar osteitis); Oral Health Related Quality of Life-14, questionnaire responses; pain (VAS score); duration of surgery; number of emergency visits; and number of missed days of work or study.ResultsThree hundred and forty-one patients with 477 lower third molars were randomised from three centres. Two hundred and sixty-eight patients with 320 mandibular third molars were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle for the primary and secondary outcomes. The overall incidence of patient-reported altered sensations one week after surgery was 6.3%. At one week there was no difference in subjective IAN injury between the CBCT and PR group. No significant differences were noted between the two groups for any of the secondary outcomes recorded.ConclusionsAlthough CBCT is a valuable diagnostic adjunct for identification of an increased risk for IAN injury, the use of CBCT does not translate into a reduction of IAN injury and other postoperative complications, after removal of the complete mandibular third molar. In these selected cases with a high risk for IAN injury, an alternative strategy, such as monitoring or a coronectomy, might be more appropriate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27980326     DOI: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6401206

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evid Based Dent        ISSN: 1462-0049


  8 in total

Review 1.  Risk factors of neurosensory deficits in lower third molar surgery: an literature review of prospective studies.

Authors:  Y Y Leung; L K Cheung
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 2.789

Review 2.  Incidence of nerve damage following third molar removal: a West of Scotland Oral Surgery Research Group study.

Authors:  F A Carmichael; D A McGowan
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 1.651

3.  Sensory impairment of the lingual and inferior alveolar nerves following removal of impacted mandibular third molars.

Authors:  D Gülicher; K L Gerlach
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.789

4.  Can preoperative imaging help to predict postoperative outcome after wisdom tooth removal? A randomized controlled trial using panoramic radiography versus cone-beam CT.

Authors:  Maria Eugenia Guerrero; Raul Botetano; Jorge Beltran; Keith Horner; Reinhilde Jacobs
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Incidence of neurosensory deficits and recovery after lower third molar surgery: a prospective clinical study of 4338 cases.

Authors:  L K Cheung; Y Y Leung; L K Chow; M C M Wong; E K K Chan; Y H Fok
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2010-01-12       Impact factor: 2.789

Review 6.  Bias due to lack of patient blinding in clinical trials. A systematic review of trials randomizing patients to blind and nonblind sub-studies.

Authors:  Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Frida Emanuelsson; Ann Sofia Skou Thomsen; Jørgen Hilden; Stig Brorson
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-05-30       Impact factor: 7.196

7.  Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials.

Authors:  Jelena Savović; Hayley E Jones; Douglas G Altman; Ross J Harris; Peter Jüni; Julie Pildal; Bodil Als-Nielsen; Ethan M Balk; Christian Gluud; Lise Lotte Gluud; John P A Ioannidis; Kenneth F Schulz; Rebecca Beynon; Nicky J Welton; Lesley Wood; David Moher; Jonathan J Deeks; Jonathan A C Sterne
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Trigeminal neurosensory deficit and patient reported outcome measures: the effect on life satisfaction and depression symptoms.

Authors:  Yiu Yan Leung; Terence Chak Pui Lee; Samuel Mun Yin Ho; Lim Kwong Cheung
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  Radiographic imaging in relation to the mandibular third molar: a survey among oral surgeons in Sweden.

Authors:  Josefine Cederhag; Anna Truedsson; Per Alstergren; Xie-Qi Shi; Kristina Hellén-Halme
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 3.573

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.