ArticleOral and maxillofacial surgery2020
Comparison of primary and secondary closure with a buccal mucosal-advancement flap on postoperative course after mandibular impacted third molar surgery.
Article in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A modified triangular flap suture method used for inferior third molar extraction: A three-arm randomized clinical trial for the assessment of quality of life.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2023Trial
- Comparison of two suture techniques on the inflammatory signs after third molars extraction-A randomized clinical trial.PloS one · 2023Trial
- Single blind, randomized study comparing clinical equivalence of TrusilkF1000Research · 2022Trial
- Improving healing after surgical extraction of partially impacted lower third molar by modification of three sided flap: a clinical pilot study.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Certainty of evidence on the effects of cryotherapy, surgical wound closure, and chlorhexidine on clinical and patient-centered outcomes after third molar surgery: evidence mapping of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2025Article
- Evaluation of wound healing following surgical extractions using the IPR Scale.International dental journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to compare primary and secondary wound closure with a buccal mucosal-advancement flap technique on the postoperative course after mandibular impacted third molar surgery.
methodsThe study was conducted on 150 patients who required surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars under local anesthesia. The study subjects were divided into three groups of 50 patients each, based on the type of closure over the third molar socket. Patients in group I underwent primary closure of the socket with hermetic suturing of the flap, including the vertical release. In group II, a secondary closure was performed, leaving the socket communicating with the oral cavity. In group III, a buccal mucosal-advancement flap technique was employed to achieve primary closure of the flap over the socket while leaving the anterior vertical release, generously patent. All the patients were assessed for pain using the visual analogue scale (VAS), swelling, and mouth opening at postoperative intervals of 2, 4, and 7 days. The wound healing was assessed on day 7.
resultsPatients in the buccal mucosal-advancement flap group had significantly less pain and swelling and increased mouth opening compared with primary and secondary closure. Wound dehiscence was seen in 18 patients and alveolar osteitis in 4 patients in primary closure. Delayed wound healing with food accumulation was seen in 6 patients in secondary closure. No complications of flap dehiscence or breakdown were observed in the buccal mucosal-advancement flap group.
conclusionThis study concludes that the buccal mucosal-advancement flap technique was a superior closure technique with less pain, swelling, trismus, and satisfactory wound healing compared with both primary and secondary closure after mandibular third molar surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31729607What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.