Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Can concentrated growth factor prevent postoperative complications of impacted third molar surgery? A split-mouth
1Department of Stomatology, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, 1279, Sanmen Road, Shanghai, 200434, China.
Objectives:
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of concentrated growth factor (CGF) on prevention of postoperative complications in the impacted third molar extraction.
Materials And Methods:
A total of 25 healthy patients with symmetrical bilaterally impacted third molars (50 extraction sites) were enrolled in this split-mouth, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Third molar extractions were performed in both sites of the mandible at the same appointment. Randomization was performed using a coin toss to choose the test and control sites. CGF was placed in the extraction socket and the socket was sutured (test group), while the contralateral socket was only sutured (control group). Each patient acted as their own control. The primary outcome were pain assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) and facial swelling on the1st, 3rd and 7th postoperative days. The secondary outcomes were bone healing in extraction sockets through alveolar bone height (ABH) and alveolar bone density (ABD) evaluated by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) immediately after extraction and in the 3rd and 6th months.
Results:
Twenty-five patients (12 female, 13 male; mean age 29.17) with bilateral impacted third molars participated in the study. A statistically significant reduction in pain was determined on the 3rd and 7th postoperative days in the CGF sites compared to the control sites while no statistically significant difference was found between the groups on the 1st postoperative day (3rd day, p = 0.009; 7th day, p = 0.039). There were no statistically significant differences in facial swelling and bone healing between the test and control groups at different time intervals, although the data obtained were slightly favoring the CGF group (p > 0.05). There were no serious adverse effects such as infection, alveolitis, paraesthesia, fracture through the follow-up period in all of the cases.
Conclusion:
The study has demonstrated the effect of CGF on relieving the severity of pain after the third molar extraction.
Clinical Relevance:
Placement of CGF in the extraction socket could relieve postoperative pain and reduce patient discomfort after the third molar extraction. CGF is recommended during the third molar extraction due to its good biological effects, low cost and simple preparation procedures.
Trial Registration Number:
ChiCTR2300077819.
