Background The aim of this study was to assess the therapeutic effects of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) on pain after the impacted third molar surgery. Material and Methods The study was carried out on 30 patients attending the outpatient department of the oral and maxillofacial surgery. Both sides’ impacted mandibular third molars were taken into consideration, and a total of 60 impacted third molars were undergone surgical extraction. After the first surgery, patients were given analgesic, antibiotics, and mouthwash as a routine treatment procedure. Following the second surgery, TENS was applied over the painful area of the cheek for patients in addition to routine treatment procedure. Pain was evaluated with Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at the postoperative 6, 8, 24 hours and 2,3,4 and 5 days. The Student t test was applied to compare pain levels between groups. P <0.05 and p <0.001 were considered significant in all statistical analyses. Results The study was carried out in 30 patients 15 (50%) female and 15 (50%) male, aged between 20 and 31 years. The mean age of the patients was 24.60 ± 4.76. There was a statistically significant difference in the evaluation of VAS levels in postoperative 6, 8, 24 hours and 2, 3, 4, and 5 days between the routine treatment group and the TENS application group. Conclusions TENS activates a complex neuronal network to result in a reduction in pain. In conclusion, TENS application was highly effective in pain modulation following the third molar surgery. Therefore, TENS, which is one of the non-pharmacological pain control methods after such surgeries, can be used safely in reducing postoperative pain. Key words: Impacted teeth, third molar, pain, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

Background and Aim: This study aimed to evaluate acute postoperative pain management and trismus in 35 patients undergoing extractions of the two mandibular third molars, in mesioangular positions, at two different visits who consumed nimesulide + thiocolchicoside or only nimesulide. Material and Methods: According to the medication given, the patients were divided into two groups. Following the first surgery of the impacted third molar patients were given nimesulide (100 mg) + thiocolchicoside (8 mg) together. The healing period was waited for 15 days and in the poursuite of the second surgery, only nimesulide (100 mg) was administered every 12 hours for 7 days. Visual analog scales (VAS) were used to assess the pain in the 6th, 8th, 12th, 24th, and 48th hours and on the 3rd, 5th, and 7th days postoperatively. Digital calipers were used to measure (in mm) the mouth opening capacity pre and postoperatively on the 2nd and 7th days, respectively. Results: Regarding pain alleviation, the nimesulide + thiocolchicoside group was more effective than the nimesulide group. The VAS levels of nimesulide + thiocolchicoside at the 6th, 8th, 12th, 24th, and 48th hours and on the 3rd and 5th days were significantly lower than the nimesulide group. The mouth opening was observed higher in the nimesulide + thiocolchicoside group than in the nimesulide group (P > 0.05). In the nimesulide group, at the end of the 7th day, the trismus measurements were less than the preoperative measurements. There was no statistically significant difference in the Nimesulide + Thiocolchicoside group in the preop-7th days. Conclusion: Nimesulide (100 mg) + thiocolchicoside (8 mg) combination has higher analgesic efficacy and better trismus outcomes compared to only nimesulide (100 mg) when orally administered following mandibular third molar surgeries.

Aims: Gelatin-thrombin matrix (GTM) is a hemostatic agent with applications in maxillofacial surgery consisting of human-derived thrombin and bovine-derived gelatin matrix. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of GTM alone or with freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) in improving early bone healing. Materials and Methods: Forty-six adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were used. All animals were randomly assigned to a control group (n = 4) and three study groups (n = 14). Each group was divided into two subgroups for histomorphometric and histological analyses at weeks 1 and 4. The new bone formation, inflammation, fibrosis, necrosis, foreign body reaction, and bone healing scores were evaluated based on the histopathological findings. Multiple comparisons were performed using the Kruskal–Wallis test. Variables that were not normally distributed were evaluated using the Mann–Whitney U test. Results: At 1 week, the GTM + FDBA group showed less bone formation (mean ± SD: 0.08 ± 0.03 mm2), compared with the study and control groups (FDBA: 0.15 ± 0.06 mm2; GTM: 0.13 ± 0.06 mm2). At 4 weeks, the GTM group (0.48 ± 0.1 mm2) showed more bone formation than the GTM + FDBA group (0.33 ± 0.17 mm2). Foreign body reactions were observed at weeks 1 and 4 in all GTM-containing groups. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, GTM group did not show a significant difference in bone formation compared with the control group. GTM did not inhibit bone healing at 1 and 4 weeks, and no significant difference was observed compared with the control groups. GTM was more effective for bone healing when administered without FDBA. GTM is considered safe when bone hemorrhage is encountered.