Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons | 2021
Does the Lingual-Based Mucoperiosteal Flap Reduce Postoperative Morbidity Compared With the Buccal-Based Mucoperiosteal Flap After the Surgical Removal of Impacted Third Molars? A Meta-analysis Review.
Abstract
PURPOSE\nThe lingual-based mucoperiosteal flap, a novel flap, was unclear about the effects on the prognosis of surgery for impacted mandibular third molars. This study aimed to compare the lingual- and buccal-based mucoperiosteal flaps with respect to postoperative responses and complications.\n\n\nMETHOD\nA systematic review with a meta-analysis was designed and the PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases and Google Scholar from January 1, 2000 to April 30, 2020 were searched for randomized clinical trials. The predictor variable was buccal- or lingual-based flap in the surgery, and the outcome variables were pain, swelling, trismus, operative time, and wound dehiscence. Other study variables were sex and retention depth of impacted teeth. RevMan 5.3 software was used for data analysis. Mean differences or standardized mean differences and risk ratios were computed to assess associations between 2 variables, where statistical significance was set at P\xa0<\xa0.05.\n\n\nRESULTS\nSeven publications met the inclusion criteria, contributing 370 subjects who had 590 teeth removed to sample. The lingual-based flap failed to significantly reduce postoperative discomfort. However, subgroup analysis revealed that subjects who underwent comma flap (a type of lingual-based flap) surgeries complained of milder pain than those who underwent buccal-based flap surgeries on day 1 (mean difference\xa0=\xa0-1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-1.53, -0.83], P\xa0<\xa0.001) and day 7 (mean difference\xa0=\xa0-1.80, 95% CI [-2.13, -1.48], P\xa0<\xa0.001) after surgery. Significant differences were also observed on days 1, 3, and 7 regarding postoperative swelling and trismus (P\xa0<\xa0.01). In addition, the lingual-based flap was reported to cause a significantly lower rate of wound dehiscence (relative risk\xa0=\xa00.46, 95% CI [0.30, 0.69], P\xa0=\xa0.0002).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThe lingual-based flap was associated with better primary wound closure in third molar removal. The comma flap, as a subtype, was preferable for relieving postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus over the buccal-based flap.