Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Effect of age, impaction types and operative time on inflammatory tissue reactions following lower third molar surgery

  • Seidu A Bello1Email author,
  • Wasiu L Adeyemo2,
  • Babatunde O Bamgbose3,
  • Emeka V Obi1 and
  • Ademola A Adeyinka1
Contributed equally
Head & Face Medicine20117:8

DOI: 10.1186/1746-160X-7-8

Received: 21 September 2010

Accepted: 28 April 2011

Published: 28 April 2011

Abstract

Background

Postoperative mobidity following third molar surgery is affected by a number of factors. The study of these factors is essential for effective planning and limitation of morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of age, type of impaction and operative time on immediate postoperative tissue reactions following mandibular third molar surgery.

Methods

Consecutive patients with impacted mandibular third molar teeth were studied. All the third molars were classified according to Winter's classification. Surgical extraction was performed on all the patients by a single surgeon under local anaesthesia. The operation time was determined by the time lapse between incision and completion of suturing. Postoperative pain, swelling and trismus were evaluated.

Results

There were 120 patients with an age range of 19-42 years. Patients in the age range of 35-42 years recorded a lower pain score (p = 0.5) on day 1. The mouth opening was much better in the lower age group on day 2 and 5 (p = 0.007 and p = 0.01 respectively). Pain, swelling and trismus increased with increasing operative time. Distoangular impaction was significantly associated with higher VAS score on day 1 and 2 (p = 0.01, 0.0, 04). Distoangular and horizontal impaction are associated with a higher degree of swelling and reduced mouth opening on postoperative review days. Vertical impaction was associated with the least degree of facial swelling and best mouth opening.

Conclusions

Increasing operating time and advancing age are associated with more postoperative morbidity, likewise distoangular and horizontal impaction types.

Background

The quality of life experienced by patients following third molar surgery is increasingly becoming a health concern [1]. Third molar surgeries are associated with unpleasant experience by the patients, referred to as postoperative morbidity, which could be divided into immediate postoperative tissue reactions and complications [2, 3]. The immediate postoperative tissue reactions are characterized by pain, swelling, trismus and dysphagia [4]. Pain, swelling and trismus are normal reactions following third molar surgery and are frequent indices of researches both in the methodology of the surgery and the pharmacology of drugs used [5].

Factors affecting postoperative morbidity could be patient factors, tooth related factors and operative factors [6]. Patient factors include age, sex, size or build, ethnic background, smoking, contraceptives and oral hygiene [7]. Tooth related factors include existing infection (pericoronitis), type of impaction, depth of impaction, relationship to inferior alveolar nerve, density of surrounding bone and associated pathology like cyst or neoplasm [8]. The operative factors include the use of drugs, type and extent of incision, wound closure technique, surgeons experience and duration of operation [9, 10]. Winter's classification [11] of impacted third molar is based on its orientation to an imaginary line passing through the occlusal surfaces of first and second molars to the retromolar areas as seen on a periapical radiograph (or an orthopanthomograph) [12]. The impactions are classified into horizontal, mesioangular, vertical, distoangular, buccolingual and ectopic. Pell and Gregory [13] similarly classified spatial relationship of impacted third molar into vertical, horizontal, inverted, mesioangular and distoangular.

The surrounding bone in young patients is relatively soft and more resilient compared to older patients, where the bone is harder, necessitating more bone removal, with more difficulty in separating tooth from bone, resulting in more postoperative pain, swelling and trismus [2, 14]. Bruce et al, [15] while investigating the role of age on postoperative morbidity associated with mandibular third molar, found that the patients above 35 years recorded more swelling and trismus. Duration of surgery is an operative factor that has been found to influence the immediate postoperative factors following impacted third molar surgery. Definition of operating time varies among different reports. Akinwande [16] defined this as the time lapse between the beginnings of bone drilling to the end. Raprastikul et al [17] on the other hand defined it as the time lapse between incision and completion of suturing. A range of 11.03 minutes to 25.0 minutes has been reported in the literatures [16, 17]. Age of patients, type of impaction and duration of operation have been mentioned in scientific literatures as factors that influence the immediate postoperative reactions following third molar surgery but objective assessment are lacking. This study aims to determine the effect of these factors on pain, swelling and trismus following mandibular third molar surgeries.

Patients and Methods

Consecutive patients scheduled to undergo surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars in the Maxillofacial Surgery Unit of State House Medical Centre, Abuja, Nigeria from February to November 2009, were recruited into the study. Clearance was obtained from the Ethics and Privileges Committee of the hospital and informed consent was signed by the patients before enrolment. Smokers, patient with systemic diseases and patients with active pericoronal lesions were excluded from the study. Orthopantomographic images were used to classify all the impacted mandibular third molars into Mesioangular, Distoangular, Vertical and Horizontal impactions based on Winter's classification.

Surgical extraction of a tooth per session was performed on all the patients by the same surgeon under local anaesthesia. For the patients that required bilateral extraction, a gap of at least 15 days was allowed between the two procedures to allow for total recovery from the first one. Access was gained through a 3-sided mucoperiosteal flap and ostectomy was carried out with a fissure bur and normal saline irrigation. With adequate ostectomy, elevation of the tooth was carried out and was followed by socket toileting. Sectioning of the tooth was carried out whenever necessary. They were then discharged home with standard postoperative instructions.

The operation time was determined by the time lapse between incision and completion of suturing. They were all placed on broad spectrum antibiotics and analgesics of diclofenac Potassium (cataflam Novartis) 50 mg 8 hourly for 3 days.

Postoperative pain, swelling and trismus were evaluated. Pain was estimated subjectively by asking the patient to rate the nociceptive experience on a visual analog scale of 0 to 5. The leaflets were handed over to them for daily entry with day 1 being the operation day and the assessment was done for 7 days.

Swelling was assessed by a modification of a 3 line measurements (Figure 1) using 5 fixed points on surgical side of the face and finding the average. (Ustun Y, Erdogan O, Esen E, Karshi E. Comparison of the effects of 2 doses of methylprednisolone on pain, swelling and trismus after third molar surgery Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endo 2003; 96: 535-539). The fixed points used were A; the most posterior point at the midline on the tragus, B; lateral canthus of the eye, C; the most lateral point on the corner of the mouth, D; soft tissue pogonium which is the most prominent point at the midline on the chin and E; most inferior point on the angle of the mandible. The 3 lines were AC, AD and BE. A baseline measurement was carried out just before the surgery and similar measurements were carried out on days 2 (48 hours), 5 and 7 post surgery. The difference between the postoperative and preoperative measurements was calculated.
Figure 1

Three-Line Facial swelling measurement.

Maximum inter-incisal distance was used as the index of trismus using Boyle's gauge-a venier calibrated calliper. Percentage mouth opening was calculated on each postoperative review days. The measurement of MID was taken from the incisal edge of the upper right central incisor (or a prosthethic equivalent) to the incisal edge of the lower right central incisor. Three readings were taken for each patient and the average was determined. This constitutes the reading for the particular day. Baseline measurements were taken just before the surgery and similar readings were carried out on days 2(48 hours), 5 and 7 postoperatively. Percentage mouth opening was calculated thus: postoperative minus preoperative measurement multiplied by 100.

Data analysis was carried out with Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 15.0 for Windows. A multivariate analysis of the effect of patients' age, sex, type of impaction and operative time on pain, swelling and trismus was also carried out. Mean values are presented with 95% confidence interval.

Results

A total of 120 patients comprising 42 male and 78 females were studied.

The age range of the patients was 19 to 42 years with a mean (SD) age of 26.7 years. Fifty-eight (48.3%) patients were in the age range of 19-26 years, fifty-three (44.2%) were in the age range of 27-34 years and nine (7.5%) were in the age range of 35-42 years. The effect of age on pain, swelling and trismus is shown in Figure 2A, 2B and 2C. Patients in the age range of 35-42 years recorded a significantly lower pain score (p = 0.5) compared with lower age groups on day 1, but subsequently the pain recorded was significantly higher than that recorded for the lower age groups (P = 0.01,0.2 on day 3 and 4 respectively). The mouth opening was much better in the lower age group on day 2 and 5 (p = 0.007 and p = 0.01 respectively). There was a steady increase in the swelling recorded with increasing age but the difference in swelling between the age group ranges were not statistically significant.
Figure 2

Effect of age on postoperative pain, swelling and trismus. A. Influence of age on Postoperative pain. B: Effect of age on Postoperative swelling. C: Influence of age on postoperative trismus.

The mean (SD) duration of operation was 22.63 (7.4) minutes with a range of 11 to 35 minutes. The distribution of operative time and its effect on postoperative pain, swelling and trismus is shown in tables 1 and 2. The pain increased progressively with increasing operative time on day 1 (p = 0.04). Even though the difference between the operative time ranges was not statistically significant, there was a progressive increase in swelling and trismus with increasing operative time.
Table 1

Influence of operative time on Postoperative pain

Operative Time/Minutes

 

VAS SCORE

  

DAY1

DAY2

DAY3

DAY4

DAY5

DAY6

DAY7

≤ 17

Mean

3.2667

1.6333

1.5000

1.2000

.9333

.7333

.5333

 

N

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

 

Std. Deviation

1.22990

1.09807

1.13715

.76112

.52083

.63968

.50742

18-23

Mean

3.3784

2.1351

1.7838

1.7568

1.6757

1.1892

.9459

 

N

37

37

37

37

37

37

37

 

Std. Deviation

1.55190

1.39766

1.22781

1.47959

1.56443

1.15079

1.02594

24-29

Mean

3.8421

1.2105

1.1053

.9474

1.2105

.4211

.4211

 

N

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

 

Std. Deviation

.83421

1.22832

.56713

.62126

.78733

.50726

.50726

30-35

Mean

4.0882

1.8235

1.3824

1.2353

1.3529

1.1471

1.1471

 

N

34

34

34

34

34

34

34

 

Std. Deviation

1.23993

1.40282

1.45674

1.07475

1.17763

.85749

.85749

P value

 

0.04

0.08

0.224

.041

.073

.005

.003

Table 2

Effect of operative time on postoperative swelling and trismus

Operative Time/Minutes

 

Swelling/mm

Mouth Opening/%

  

DAY2

DAY5

DAY7

DAY2

DAY5

DAY7

≤ 17

Mean

6.8900

2.1500

1.4567

63.6450

72.1510

79.4743

 

N

30

30

30

30

30

30

 

Std. Deviation

5.72968

2.65664

2.70933

18.61544

22.43444

22.35302

18-23

Mean

7.6189

3.4541

2.6649

66.5241

73.4819

81.7759

 

N

37

37

37

37

37

37

 

Std. Deviation

4.37168

3.73189

3.55162

23.08559

22.64894

22.45892

24-29

Mean

9.9632

4.2316

3.0158

56.5837

61.1089

67.7526

 

N

19

19

19

19

19

19

 

Std. Deviation

7.65014

4.31110

2.75606

15.73888

17.23444

21.27848

30-35

Mean

9.5218

2.9853

2.1441

59.2153

64.4185

68.9188

 

N

34

34

34

34

34

34

 

Std. Deviation

7.63341

3.61605

2.51603

20.02752

21.30764

22.86510

P value

 

.217

.223

.246

0.257

0.102

.032

The distribution of types of impaction and its effect on pain, swelling and trismus is shown in tables 3 and 4. Distoangular impaction is significantly associated with higher VAS score on Day 1 and 2 (p = 0.01, 0.004) when compared with the other types of impaction. Distoangular and Horizontal impaction are associated with a higher degree of swelling (p = 0.2, 0.5 and 0.0 on days 2, 5 and 7 respectively), and reduced mouth opening (p = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 on days 2, 5 and 7 respectively) on postoperative review days when compared with vertical and mesioangular impaction. Vertical impaction was associated with the least degree of facial swelling and best mouth opening among the types of impaction
Table 3

Relationship of type of impaction and postoperative pain

TYPE OF IMPACTION

 

VASUAL ANALOGUE SCALE SCORE

  

DAY1

DAY2

DAY3

DAY4

DAY5

DAY6

DAY7

MA

Mean

3.3721

1.6744

1.4419

1.1163

.9767

.8372

.6744

 

N

43

43

43

43

43

43

43

 

Std. Deviation

1.34560

1.04017

.98325

.76249

.63577

.65211

.60635

V

Mean

3.2174

1.7391

1.3913

1.3913

1.2174

.8261

.7826

 

N

23

23

23

23

23

23

23

 

Std. Deviation

1.44463

1.32175

1.43777

1.33958

.99802

1.11405

1.12640

DA

Mean

4.3333

2.5833

1.8750

1.6667

1.6667

1.1667

1.0417

 

N

24

24

24

24

24

24

24

 

Std. Deviation

.81650

1.83958

1.51263

1.30773

1.09014

1.04950

.85867

H

Mean

3.7333

1.3000

1.3333

1.3667

1.6333

1.0000

.8667

 

N

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

 

Std. Deviation

1.33735

.91539

1.02833

1.21721

1.71169

.94686

.86037

P value

 

.011

.004

.372

.289

.041

.475

.380

Key

MA-Mesioangular, V-Vertical, DA-Distoangular, H-Horizontal

Table 4

Influence of type of impaction on postoperative swelling and Trismus

TYPE OF IMPACTION

SWELLING/mm

Mouth Opening/%

  

DAY2

DAY5

DAY7

DAY2

DAY5

DAY7

Mesioangular

Mean

7.2372

2.6814

.9070

59.4644

65.2314

71.4926

 

N

43

43

43

43

43

43

 

Std. Deviation

5.39210

3.21864

2juoop.04709

19.82389

22.11400

21.36244

Vertical

Mean

6.3261

1.9478

.7435

78.0052

84.9270

93.1578

 

N

23

23

23

23

23

23

 

Std. Deviation

6.06549

2.08324

1.54090

15.42520

15.00169

11.78812

Distoangular

Mean

8.9475

3.2417

1.6750

56.1121

63.0758

69.7213

 

N

24

24

24

24

24

24

 

Std. Deviation

7.23615

4.03570

2.04605

17.48335

23.35297

25.98941

Horizontal

Mean

11.0067

4.5433

4.0200

58.7123

65.4190

71.6787

 

N

30

30

30

30

30

30

 

Std. Deviation

6.41555

4.24408

3.50698

20.75739

19.14016

23.29330

P value

 

.026

.047

.000

.000

.001

.000

A multivariate analysis of the effect of patients'age, sex, type of impaction and operative time on pain, swelling and trismus is shown in table 5. Using Pillai's Trace, patients'sex, with an eigen value of 0.65, contributed least to the dependent variables of pain, swelling and trismus while operative time as a single factor, affected the dependent factors most with an eigenvalue of 1.46. Interaction of operative time and type of impaction had the highest eigenvalue of 2.66 compared to other factors matrix tests, indicating that the interactions of operative time and types of impaction affected swelling, trismus and pains observed in operated patients most. The significance of all the model matrixes (p < 0.5) is an indication that the effects of age, sex, type of impaction and operative on pain, swelling and trismus were not due to chance. However, Roy's largest root is equal to Hotelling's trace (0.352), in the case of operative time and sex interaction, which implies that sex effect does not contribute much to the output of variables of pain, swelling and trismus.
Table 5

Multivariate Tests of the effects of Operative time, Age range, Type of Impaction and Sex on swelling, Trismus and pain

Factor

 

Value

F

Hypothesis df

Error df

Sig.

Partial Eta Squared

Operative Time Range

Pillai's Trace

1.458

5.744

39.000

237.000

.000

.486

 

Wilks' Lambda

.107

6.595

39.000

228.761

.000

.525

 

Hotelling's Trace

3.869

7.507

39.000

227.000

.000

.563

 

Roy's Largest Root

2.598

15.786(b)

13.000

79.000

.000

.722

Age Range

Pillai's Trace

.938

5.296

26.000

156.000

.000

.469

 

Wilks' Lambda

.213

6.901(a)

26.000

154.000

.000

.538

 

Hotelling's Trace

2.980

8.711

26.000

152.000

.000

.598

 

Roy's Largest Root

2.720

16.320(b)

13.000

78.000

.000

.731

Type of Impaction

Pillai's Trace

1.075

3.395

39.000

237.000

.000

.358

 

Wilks' Lambda

.211

4.054

39.000

228.761

.000

.405

 

Hotelling's Trace

2.489

4.829

39.000

227.000

.000

.453

 

Roy's Largest Root

1.923

11.688(b)

13.000

79.000

.000

.658

Sex

Pillai's Trace

.646

10.786(a)

13.000

77.000

.000

.646

 

Wilks' Lambda

.354

10.786(a)

13.000

77.000

.000

.646

 

Hotelling's Trace

1.821

10.786(a)

13.000

77.000

.000

.646

 

Roy's Largest Root

1.821

10.786(a)

13.000

77.000

.000

.646

Operative Time Range * Age Range

Pillai's Trace

.879

2.520

39.000

237.000

.000

.293

 

Wilks' Lambda

.308

2.863

39.000

228.761

.000

.325

 

Hotelling's Trace

1.651

3.204

39.000

227.000

.000

.355

 

Roy's Largest Root

1.165

7.077(b)

13.000

79.000

.000

.538

Operative Time Range * Type of Impaction

Pillai's Trace

2.655

5.008

78.000

492.000

.000

.443

 

Wilks' Lambda

.009

7.520

78.000

430.658

.000

.546

 

Hotelling's Trace

12.894

12.453

78.000

452.000

.000

.682

 

Roy's Largest Root

9.324

58.815(b)

13.000

82.000

.000

.903

Age Range * Type of Impaction

Pillai's Trace

.591

2.518

26.000

156.000

.000

.296

 

Wilks' Lambda

.490

2.539(a)

26.000

154.000

.000

.300

 

Hotelling's Trace

.875

2.559

26.000

152.000

.000

.304

 

Roy's Largest Root

.599

3.592(b)

13.000

78.000

.000

.374

Operative Time Range * Sex

Pillai's Trace

.261

2.087(a)

13.000

77.000

.024

.261

 

Wilks' Lambda

.739

2.087(a)

13.000

77.000

.024

.261

 

Hotelling's Trace

.352

2.087(a)

13.000

77.000

.024

.261

 

Roy's Largest Root

.352

2.087(a)

13.000

77.000

.024

.261

Type of Impaction * Sex

Pillai's Trace

1.303

11.205

26.000

156.000

.000

.651

 

Wilks' Lambda

.111

11.875(a)

26.000

154.000

.000

.667

 

Hotelling's Trace

4.298

12.562

26.000

152.000

.000

.682

 

Roy's Largest Root

3.090

18.540(b)

13.000

78.000

.000

.756

Discussion

Severity of pain, amount of swelling and degree of trismus are the primary indicators of patients discomfort following surgical extraction of an impacted third molar tooth [17].

This study recorded a significant influence of age on post operative morbidity following surgical extraction of impacted third molar teeth. A higher degree of trismus and facial swelling was recorded in patients with advancing age. This finding is in agreement with some studies [15, 18, 19]. Bruce et al, [15] while investigating the role of age on postoperative morbidity associated with mandibular third molar, found that patients above 35 years recorded more swelling and trismus. According to de Boer [18], older patients appeared to complain of more post operative symptoms after removal of their third molar than did young patient. The reason might be that erupted molars in older patient have been used for mastication and are therefore more tightly connected to the alveolar bone by the periodontal ligament which requires more aggression to remove. Third molar surgery result in physical injury to the tissues and are therefore followed by inflammatory reaction [5, 20]. It has been proposed that following tissue injury or inflammation, there is a sequential release of mediators from mast cells, the vasculature and other cells. Histamine and serotonin appear first, followed shortly after by bradykinnin and later prostaglandins and other eicosanoids. Bradykinnin has been shown to produce pain in man when given intradermally, intraarterially or intraperitoneally and the hyperalgesia associated with prostaglandin is also due to its potentiation of Bradykinnin effect [20]. Postoperative swelling results from accumulation of protein rich exudates within the surrounding tissue and trismus occurred as a result of spasm of muscle fibres following inflammatory processes. These reactions (pain, swelling and trismus) may be a consequence of the formation of prostaglandins and other mediators of inflammation derived from membrane phospholipids, which are released following surgery [5]. Chiapasco et al [2] believe that the correlation between age and post operative complications might be related to increased bone density which may result in more manipulation during the operation.

This study recorded a lower score of pain perception in the older patient than the younger ones within the first 24 hours of surgery. Pain following third molar surgery has been shown to peak within 24 hours of surgery which has equally been confirmed with this study [4]. Pain is an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage or described in terms of such damage [21]. Information about injury or the threat of injury (due to mechanical, thermal or chemical causes) is conveyed by a specialized set of peripheral nerve fibres termed 'nociceptors', which are mainly Aδ and C fibres. Interpretation of this information (impulse) in the central nervous system is affected by many factors including earlier experience, possible concomitant stimuli from other parts of the body and individual's pain threshold [22]. This makes perception of pain very complex and subjective. Hyperalgesia which follows tissue injury and inflammation following third molar surgery, is based at least in part, on sensitization of norciceptors, but age could be a factor in which older patients have higher threshold and hence lower pain score.

The mean operation time of 22.63 recorded in this study is similar to 21.92 and 25.0 mins reported by Raprastikul et al [17] and Saglam et al [23] respectively but at variance with 11.03 mins recorded by Lopez et al [24]. Variability of operation time could be due to surgeons experience, the definition of operation time and the need for extra attachments like tube drain during the operation. A steady increase in severity of pain, trismus and swelling was observed with increased operation time despite the fact that the difference was not statistically significant. In a study on a consecutive series of 104 patients, Garcia et al [4] reported a correlation between operation time duration and analgesic use over the first 48 hours post surgery. The same finding was also reported by Perderson et al [10] while investigating the interrelation of complaints after removal of impacted mandibular third molars. The duration of operation in the hand of a single surgeon could be a reflection of the difficulty and hence duration of tissue injury associated with the operation [25]. The longer the duration of tissue injury, the more the amount of mediators released and therefore could be a reflection of the severity of pain, swelling and trismus.

The commonest type of impaction, mesioangular (n = 43,35.8%), recorded in this study is similar to the reports from earlier studies [2628]. During normal development, the lower third molar begins its development in a horizontal angulation and as the jaw grows the angulation changes from horizontal to mesioangular then to vertical. Failure of rotation from the mesioangular to the vertical direction is the most common cause of a tooth becoming impacted [27]. Distoangular and horizontal type of impaction have been shown to be associated with higher degree of pain, swelling and trismus when compared with vertical and mesioangular type of impactions in this study. The type of impaction is an anatomical factor that determines the point of purchase (point of application of an elevator) and the extraction movements necessary to deliver a tooth during surgery [14]. The type of impaction gives a prediction of the difficulty of extraction and hence the severity of postoperative reactions. The difficulty reportedly encountered in decreasing order has been distoangular, horizontal, vertical and mesioangular [27]. Chiapasco et al [2] in their study reported 6.5% complication rate in association with distoangular impaction as opposed to 2.7% of vertical impaction. They concluded that this observation could be a reflection of surgical aggressiveness that is associated with this type of impaction.

Conclusions

The knowledge of the effect age, operation time and type of impaction on postoperative inflammatory reactions following third molar surgery is very important because it will assist in treatment planning. It could be used as an objective tool to educate patients on the need for early extraction of an impacted third molar to minimize postoperative morbidity. The type of impaction is developmental and cannot be controlled but the knowledge could assist in objective education of patients on possible postoperative reactions for medico- legal reasons.

Authors Information

Seidu Adebayo Bello, BDS, FMCDS, FWACS,

Wasiu Lanre Adeyemo, BDS, FMCDS, FWACS, Dr. Med. Dent., FICS

Babatunde Olamide Bamgbose, BDS, FMCDS

Emeka Vitalis Obi, BDS

Ademola A Adeyinka BDS

Notes

Declarations

Acknowledgements

I hereby acknowledge Mr Jayeoba O.J. of the department of agronomy, Faculty of agriculture, Nasarawa State University, for his contribution to the statistical analysis. The logistic support received from the administrative department of State House Medical Centre towards the success of the study, is also acknowledged.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Dental & Maxillofacial Surgery, State House Medical Centre
(2)
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Lagos University Teaching Hospital
(3)
College of Dentistry, University of Nebraska Medical Center

References

  1. Ruta DA, Bissias E, Ogston S, Ogden GR: Assessing health outcomes after extraction of third molars: the postoperative symptoms severity (PoSSe) scale. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000, 38: 480-487. 10.1054/bjom.2000.0339.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Chiapasco M, De Cicco L, Marroneh K: Side effects and complications associated with third molar surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1993, 76: 412-420. 10.1016/0030-4220(93)90005-O.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Lopes V, Mumenya R, Feinmann C, Harris M: Third molar surgery: An audit of the indications for surgery, post operative complaints and patient satisfaction. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995, 33: 33-35. 10.1016/0266-4356(95)90083-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Garcia GA, Sampedro FH, Rey JH, Torreira MG: Trismus and pain after removal of impacted lower third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997, 55: 1223-1226. 10.1016/S0278-2391(97)90172-5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Schultze-mosgau S, Schmelzeisen JC, Frolich JC, Schmele H: Use of ibuprofen and methylprednisolone for the prevention of pain and swelling after removal of impacted third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995, 53: 2-7. 10.1016/0278-2391(95)90486-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bui Chi H, Seldin EB, Dodson TB: Types, frequencies and risk factors for complications after third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003, 61: 1379-1389. 10.1016/j.joms.2003.04.001.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Reuton T, Smeeton N, Mcurk M: Factors predictive of difficulty of mandibular third molar surgery. Br Dent J. 2001, 190: 607-610.Google Scholar
  8. Gaya MVO, Capilla MV, Mateos RG: Relation of patient and surgical variables to postoperative pain and inflammation in the extraction of third molars. Medicinal Oral. 2002, 7: 360-369.Google Scholar
  9. Jerjes W, El-Maaytah M, Swinson B, Banu B, Upile T: Expe-rience versus complication rate in third molar surgery. Head and Face Medicine. 2006, 2: 14-10.1186/1746-160X-2-14. Available on med.com/2/1/14[Accessed 11th Feb, 2010]View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Pederson A: Inter-relationship of complaints after removal of impacted third molars. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1985, 14: 241-247.Google Scholar
  11. Winter GB: Principles of exodontias as applied to the impacted third molar 1st ed. St. Louis American medical books 1926. Contemporary Oral and Maxillofacial Sugery. Edited by: Peterson LJ, Ellis E, Hupp JR, Tucker MR. 1993, Mosby, St Louis, 225-260. 2Google Scholar
  12. Albert DGM, Gomes ACA, Vasconcelos BCE, Silva EDO, Hollanda GZ: Comparison of orthopantomographs and conventional tomo-graphy images for assessing the relationship between impacted lower third molars and the mandibular canal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006, 64: 1030-1037. 10.1016/j.joms.2006.03.020.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Pell GJ, Gregory BT: Impacted mandibular third molars: classification and modified techniques for removal. Dental Digest. 1933, 19: 430-Obiechina AE. Update in the technique of third molar surgery. Ann of Ibadan Postgrad Med 2003, 1 40-45Google Scholar
  14. Gbotolorun OM, Arotiba GT, Ladeinde AL: Assessment of factors associated with surgical difficulty in impacted mandibular third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007, 65: 1977-1983. 10.1016/j.joms.2006.11.030.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Bruce RA, Frederickson GC, Small GS: Age of patients and morbidity associated with mandibular third molar surgery. J Am Dent Assoc. 1980, 101: 240-244.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Akinwande JA: Mandibular third molar impaction-A comparison of two methods for predicting surgical difficulty. Nig Dent J. 1991, 10 (1): 3-7.Google Scholar
  17. Rakprasitkul S, Pairuchives V: Mandibular third molar surgery with primary closure and tubedrain. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997, 26: 187-190.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. de Boer M, Raghoebar GM, Stegenga B, Schoen PJ, Boering G: Complications after mandibular third molar extraction. Quitessence Int. 1995, 26: 779-784.Google Scholar
  19. Capuzzi P, Montebugnoli L, Vaccaro MA: Extraction of impacted third molars, a longitudinal prospective study on factors that affect postoperative recovery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1994, 77: 341-343. 10.1016/0030-4220(94)90194-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Cotran RS, Kumar V, Collins T: Robbins Pathologic basis of disease. 1999, W.B. Sanders Company, Philadephia, 50-87. 6Google Scholar
  21. Seymour RA, Meechan JG, Blair GS: An investigation into post operative pain after third molar surgery under local analgesia. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1985, 23: 410-415. 10.1016/0266-4356(85)90025-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Haefeli M, Elfering A: Pain assessment. Eur Spine J. 2006, 15: S17-S24. 10.1007/s00586-005-1044-x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Saglam AA: Effect of tube drain with primary closure technique on postoperative trismus and swelling after removal of fully impacted mandibular third molars. Quintessence Int. 2003, 34: 143-147.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lopez-Carriches C, Rafael GF, Jose MM, Manuel DF: Influence of smoking upon the post operative course of lower third molar surgery. Med Oral Pathol Oral Cir Bucal. 2006, 11: 56-60.Google Scholar
  25. Benediktsdottir IE, Wenzel A, Petersen JK, Hintze H: Mandibular third molar removal: risk indicators for extended operation time, post operative pain and complication. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 2004, 79: 438-446.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Quek SL, Tay CK, Tay KH, Toh SL, Lim KC: Pattern of third molar impaction in a Singapore Chinese population: a retrospective radiographic survey. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003, 32: 548-552.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Peterson LJ, Ellis E, Hupp JR, Tucker MR: Contemporary Oral and Maxillofacial sugery. 1993, Mosby, St Louis, 225-260. 2Google Scholar
  28. Saheeb BDO, Obuekwe ON: An audit of mandibular third molar surgery. Nig J Surg Research. 2001, 3 (2): 66-74.Google Scholar

Copyright

© Bello et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.