ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Analysis of Envelope and Triangular Flap Designs in Reducing Postoperative Sequelae Following Mandibular Third Molar Disimpaction.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSurgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars often results in postoperative complications, such as pain, swelling, trismus, and periodontal changes, which can affect patient recovery. The choice of the flap design may influence these outcomes. This study compared the envelope flap and triangular flap with the modified Ward's incision to minimize postoperative sequelae, focusing on pain, facial swelling, maximum mouth opening, and probing pocket depth, and to provide evidence-based insights for optimizing surgical outcomes in third molar disimpaction. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective comparative study was conducted at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, involving 40 systemically healthy patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists or ASA I or II) aged 18-50 years with mesioangular, distoangular, or vertically impacted mandibular third molars. Patients were assigned to two groups (n=20 each): Group 1 (triangular flap with modified Ward's incision) and Group 2 (envelope flap). Standardized surgical protocols were followed, with local anesthesia and primary closure using 3-0 silk sutures. Postoperative outcomes such as pain (visual analog scale), maximum mouth opening (interincisal distance), facial swelling (metric facial measurements), and probing pocket depth were assessed on days 1, 3, and 7 and at 3 months. Data were analyzed using independent t-tests and repeated-measures analysis of variance with a significance threshold of p≤0.05.
resultsBoth groups showed significant improvements in all parameters over time (p<0.001). The envelope flap group had less facial swelling (117.68±6.27 mm on day 1, further reduced by day 7) than the triangular flap group (119.80±5.29 mm on day 1, increased on days 3 and 7). Maximum mouth opening improved faster in the envelope group (21.50±4.47 mm on day 1, significant by day 3) than the triangular group (22.70±5.27 mm on day 1). Pain decreased similarly, from 7.90±0.85 (envelope) and 7.80±0.83 (triangular) to 1.25±0.91 and 1.80±0.83 by day 7, with no notable differences. The probing pocket depth increased temporarily (mean difference = 1.47 mm, p<0.001) but equalized by 3 months (p=0.157). The simpler design of the envelope flap likely reduced tissue trauma and inflammation, enhancing swelling and trismus outcomes.
conclusionThe envelope flap outperformed the triangular flap in reducing postoperative swelling and enhancing early mouth opening recovery, making it preferable for routine mandibular third molar extractions. Both techniques ensured comparable pain control and periodontal healing, supporting their use based on case-specific requirements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.