ABSTRACT:Aims & Objectives:
The aim of this study is to compare flap versus flapless surgery for the removal of partially impacted mandibular third molars and to evaluate the merits and demerits of the surgical removal of partially impacted mandibular third molars with and without buccal flap in terms of operating time, postoperative pain, swelling and pocket depth distal to second molar and to compare clinically the healing by primary and secondary intention.
Materials & Methods: A prospective, randomized, split-mouth designed study was conducted on 15 medically healthy patients [30 mandibular 3rd molars] between the age group of 18-40 years with bilaterally symmetrical, partially impacted mandibular third molars were the study sample. All the patients underwent bilateral extraction of partially impacted mandibular third molars with flapless technique on one side and buccal flap technique on the other side. Both techniques were compared in terms of pain, swelling, trismus, pocket depth distal to 2nd molar and operating time at immediate postoperative, 1st day, 2nd day, 7th day, 1st month and 2nd month postoperative. Results: Statistically significant difference was obtained flapless and buccal flap techniques in terms of pain, swelling, trismus, pocket depth distal to 2nd molar and operating time. The mean pain, swelling, pocket depth distal to 2nd molar and operating time were all found to be higher in buccal flap technique compared to flapless technique.
Conclusion: Flapless technique can be used frequently for removal of partially impacted mandibular third molars so that, the postoperative sequelae that cause distress to the patient and affect the patient’s quality of life after surgery can be avoided.