Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Trial Review
The ANZCTR website will be unavailable from 1pm until 3pm (AEDT) on Wednesday the 30th of October for website maintenance. Please be sure to log out of the system in order to avoid any loss of data.
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial registered on ANZCTR
Registration number
ACTRN12610000500055
Ethics application status
Approved
Date submitted
16/06/2010
Date registered
17/06/2010
Date last updated
17/06/2010
Type of registration
Retrospectively registered
Titles & IDs
Public title
Influence of a pedicle flap design on post-operative sequelae after lower wisdom tooth removal
Query!
Scientific title
Influence of a pedicle mucoperiosteal flap design on pain, swelling, trismus, alveolar osteitis (dry socket), infection, gingival recession, periodontal pocketing and attachment loss after lower third molar removal
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
252038
0
Nil
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
U1111-1115-4965
Query!
Trial acronym
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Post-operative complications after lower third molar removal
257575
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Surgery
257745
257745
0
0
Query!
Surgical techniques
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
A mucoperiosteal flap often needs to be raised to remove impacted lower third molar teeth. The intervention involves the use of a pedicle flap design to raise the mucoperiosteum for lower third molar removal. The pedicle flap is used on one randomly assigned side of the patients lower jaw for this procedure, then the control flap is used on the other side around three weeks later, or vice versa. The order the flap designs are used in is also randomly assigned. The pedicle flap design involves an incision placed in the buccal gingival sulcus from the mesio-buccal line angle of the first molar to the most distal visible aspect of the third molar. Distal to the third molar the incision is extended approximately 1cm and curved towards the buccal sulcus to allow for rotation of the flap and primary closure over sound bone. Prior to closure the gingival papilla distal to the second molar is removed and the apex of the pedicle de-epithelialised. A lingual flap is raised in the subperiosteal plane and the lingual nerve protected using a Howarth retractor. A round surgical bur and copious irrigation was used to remove bone superior, distal and buccal to the crown of the third molar tooth. A fissure bur was used to section the tooth if required. The tooth is then elevated and delivered and the dental follicle removed. Sterile saline irrigation of the socket was carried out to remove debris. Interrupted and horizontal mattress sutures (3-0 polyglactin 910; Undyed Vicryl Rapide; Ethicon, Somerville, New Jersey, USA) are placed to stabilize the flap and close the extraction site to the desired degree. Each operation takes around 20 minutes. The participants are then followed up two and seven days after the procedure and again at six and nine months post-operatively.
Query!
Intervention code [1]
256669
0
Treatment: Surgery
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
The comparator involves the use of the conventional envelope flap design to raise the mucoperiosteum for lower third molar removal. The conventional envelope flap is used on one randomly assigned side of the patients lower jaw for this procedure, then the test flap is used on the other side around three weeks later, or vice versa. The order the flap designs are used in is also randomly assigned. The conventional envelope flap design involves an incision placed in the buccal gingival sulcus from the mesio-buccal line angle of the first molar to the most distal visible aspect of the third molar. A releaving incision is then made extended up the external oblique ridge. A lingual flap is raised in the subperiosteal plane and the lingual nerve protected using a Howarth retractor. A round surgical bur and copious irrigation was used to remove bone superior, distal and buccal to the crown of the third molar tooth. A fissure bur was used to section the tooth if required. The tooth is then elevated and delivered and the dental follicle removed. Sterile saline irrigation of the socket was carried out to remove debris. Interrupted and horizontal mattress sutures (3-0 polyglactin 910; Undyed Vicryl Rapide; Ethicon, Somerville, New Jersey, USA) are placed to stabilize the flap and close the extraction site to the desired degree. Each operation takes around 20 minutes. The participants are then followed up two and seven days after the procedure and again at six and nine months post-operatively.
Query!
Control group
Active
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
258626
0
Pain levels were evaluated by asking the patient to mark on a visual analogue scale the level of pain they were experiencing both at rest and on maximal mouth opening. They were also asked to record the amount of each of the prescribed analgesics they used.
Query!
Assessment method [1]
258626
0
Query!
Timepoint [1]
258626
0
Pre-operative and two and seven days post-operatively.
Query!
Primary outcome [2]
258631
0
Oro-facial swelling was assessed subjectively by asking participants to look into a mirror and mark on a separate visual analogue scale the level of facial swelling they felt was present.
Query!
Assessment method [2]
258631
0
Query!
Timepoint [2]
258631
0
Pre-operative and two and seven days post-operatively.
Query!
Primary outcome [3]
258632
0
Trismus was assessed by measuring the maximal interincisal distance i.e. the distance between the mesio-incisal edges of the maxillary and mandibular right central incisor teeth during maximal mouth opening with a standard ruler in millimeters.
Query!
Assessment method [3]
258632
0
Query!
Timepoint [3]
258632
0
Pre-operative and two and seven days post-operatively.
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
264582
0
Gingival recession was evaluated by measuring the distance from the gingiva margin distal to the second molar to the cemento-enamel junction at the distobuccal and distolingual surfaces of the second molar tooth to the nearest millimeter using a periodontal probe.
Query!
Assessment method [1]
264582
0
Query!
Timepoint [1]
264582
0
Pre-operative and six and nine months post-operative
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
264587
0
Pocket depth was assessed by measuring the distance from the gingiva margin distal to the second molar to the depth of the periodontal pocket at the same two points. The probe tip was inserted into the gingival sulcus parallel to the long axis of the tooth until slight resistance was met and the depth was measured.
Query!
Assessment method [2]
264587
0
Query!
Timepoint [2]
264587
0
Pre-operative and six and nine months post-operative
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
264588
0
Clinical attachment loss was then calculated by the subtraction of the gingival recession from the pocket depth measurements.
Query!
Assessment method [3]
264588
0
Query!
Timepoint [3]
264588
0
Pre-operative and six and nine months post-operative
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
264589
0
The amount of plaque present on the second molar tooth and the gingival inflammation distal to the second molar tooth were assessed clinically using indices described by Silness et al. (1964) and Loe et al. (1963) respectively.
Query!
Assessment method [4]
264589
0
Query!
Timepoint [4]
264589
0
Pre-operative and six and nine months post-operative
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
264590
0
Participants were asked if they had suffered any sensitivity in their lower second molar tooth since the procedure.
Query!
Assessment method [5]
264590
0
Query!
Timepoint [5]
264590
0
Pre-operative and six and nine months post-operative
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
264591
0
The presence/absence of dry socket/infection was clinically assessed.
Query!
Assessment method [6]
264591
0
Query!
Timepoint [6]
264591
0
Pre-operative and two and seven days post-operatively.
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
The inclusion criteria for this study included: bilateral symmetrically impacted partially erupted mandibular third molars, with no associated pathology, no medical conditions or medications that may alter wound healing potential, must be American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification I or II, and aged between sixteen and forty years of age.
Query!
Minimum age
16
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
40
Years
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
Yes
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
Patients were excluded from the study if there was a history of abuse of midazolam, allergy to any medications used during or after the procedure for patient management, were on long term steroid or bisphosphonate medication, pregnancy, previous or present radiotherapy to the third molar tooth region of the lower jaw, or had a bone disorder such as Paget’s disease or fibrous dysplasia that could interfere with bone healing.
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Participants were selected from the University of Otago, Faculty of Dentistry waiting list for extraction of lower wisdom teeth which had been assessed and required removal based on clinical and radiographic grounds. Participants were randomly allocated into one of two groups using the logan envelope technique. In one group the first procedure was carried out using the envelope flap design, while with the other the pedicle design was used first. Both flap designs were then randomly allocated to either the left or right side of each participant’s lower jaw again using the logan envelope technique. The logan envelope technique involves taking two large envelopes and filling each with the same number of smaller envelopes containing equal amounts of letters. Each letter had written on it either envelope or pedicle flap in one large envelope and left or right on the other.
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Sequence generation was carried out also using the logan envelope technique mentioned above.
Query!
Masking / blinding
Blinded (masking used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Crossover
Query!
Other design features
Only one surgeon carried out all the procedures and only one clinician carried out all of the pre- and post-operative examinations
Query!
Phase
Not Applicable
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Safety/efficacy
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Active, not recruiting
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
1/04/2009
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Sample size
Target
52
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
Query!
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1]
2700
0
New Zealand
Query!
State/province [1]
2700
0
Dunedin
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Funding source category [1]
257141
0
Charities/Societies/Foundations
Query!
Name [1]
257141
0
New Zealand Dental Research Foundation
Query!
Address [1]
257141
0
PO Box 28084
Remuera
Auckland 1541
New Zealand Dental Association (NZDA) House
1/195 Main Highway
Ellerslie
Auckland 1051
Query!
Country [1]
257141
0
New Zealand
Query!
Funding source category [2]
257142
0
University
Query!
Name [2]
257142
0
Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago Fuller Scholarship
Query!
Address [2]
257142
0
310 Great King st
Dunedin 9054
PO Box 647
University of Otago
Dunedin 9054
Query!
Country [2]
257142
0
New Zealand
Query!
Primary sponsor type
University
Query!
Name
Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago
Query!
Address
310 Great King st
Dunedin 9054
PO Box 647
University of Otago
Dunedin 9054
Query!
Country
New Zealand
Query!
Secondary sponsor category [1]
256406
0
None
Query!
Name [1]
256406
0
Query!
Address [1]
256406
0
Query!
Country [1]
256406
0
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Approved
Query!
Ethics committee name [1]
259178
0
Lower South Regional Ethics Committee of New Zealand
Query!
Ethics committee address [1]
259178
0
PO Box 5849 Dunedin 9058 c/- Ministry of Health 229 Moray Place Dunedin 9016
Query!
Ethics committee country [1]
259178
0
New Zealand
Query!
Date submitted for ethics approval [1]
259178
0
10/06/2008
Query!
Approval date [1]
259178
0
27/03/2009
Query!
Ethics approval number [1]
259178
0
LRS/08/07/027
Query!
Ethics committee name [2]
259179
0
University of Otago Maori consultation process - Ngai Tahu Research Consultation Committes
Query!
Ethics committee address [2]
259179
0
University of Otago 364 Leith Walk Dunedin 9016 PO Box 56 Dunedin 9054
Query!
Ethics committee country [2]
259179
0
New Zealand
Query!
Date submitted for ethics approval [2]
259179
0
29/04/2008
Query!
Approval date [2]
259179
0
01/05/2008
Query!
Ethics approval number [2]
259179
0
29/04/2008 - 32
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
A sample of patients was obtained from the waiting list at the the School of Dentistry with symmetrically impacted lower wisdom teeth. The patients will receive removal of their wisdom tooth incorporating a different gum flap (incision) design randomly assigned to each side; a conventional flap or a pedicle flap design. Post-extraction complications, including pain, swelling, delayed healing, jaw muscle spasm, gum recession and associated tooth sensitivity will be evaluated immediately after the procedure and at a subsequent review appointment. To ascertain severity of sequelae, a comparison will be made of preoperative and postoperative values and conclusions drawn from the data. It is hypothesised that a pedicle flap will reduce the risk or severity of the above mentioned post-operative complications after lower third molar removal
Query!
Trial website
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
31296
0
Query!
Address
31296
0
Query!
Country
31296
0
Query!
Phone
31296
0
Query!
Fax
31296
0
Query!
Email
31296
0
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
14543
0
Sam Goldsmith
Query!
Address
14543
0
Oral Surgery Department
Faculty of Dentistry
PO Box 647
University of Otago
Dunedin 9054
Query!
Country
14543
0
New Zealand
Query!
Phone
14543
0
+64 3 4797023
Query!
Fax
14543
0
+64 3 4797023
Query!
Email
14543
0
[email protected]
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
Name
5471
0
Sam Goldsmith
Query!
Address
5471
0
Oral Surgery Department
Faculty of Dentistry
PO Box 647
University of Otago
Dunedin 9054
Query!
Country
5471
0
New Zealand
Query!
Phone
5471
0
+64 3 4797023
Query!
Fax
5471
0
+64 3 4797023
Query!
Email
5471
0
[email protected]
Query!
No information has been provided regarding IPD availability
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Results publications and other study-related documents
Documents added manually
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Documents added automatically
No additional documents have been identified.
Download to PDF