Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Extraction

2

Review clinical trials related to Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Extraction. Use filters to narrow results by trial status, phase, treatment, biological sex and sponsor.

Condition / disease
Location
Status: Recruiting

Comparison of PRF and Corticosteroids in Impacted Third Molar Surgery

This prospective, randomized interventional study aims to compare the postoperative effects of standard treatment (control), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), and PRF combined with corticosteroid treatment in patients undergoing impacted mandibular third molar surgery. A total of 60 participants will be randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups according to the study protocol. Postoperative pain, facial swelling, and trismus will be evaluated on postoperative days 1, 2, 3, and 7. The findings of this study are expected to provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of PRF alone and PRF combined with corticosteroid treatment in reducing postoperative complications following impacted mandibular third molar surgery.

Participants needed: 60
Trial details
Age: 18+Biological sex: AllType: InterventionalSponsor: Final International UniversityUpdated: Aug 3, 2026Locations: 1
Eligibility criteria

Patients aged 18 years and older. [+3]

Patients with systemic diseases that may impair wound healing (e.g., uncontrolle... [+7]

Status: Not yet recruiting

Autologous Dentine Graft Compared to Xenograft in Managing Periodontally Compromised Second Molar After Third Molar Removal

The goal of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of autologous dentin graft (ADG) in treating periodontal defects on the distal aspect of mandibular 2nd molar (M2) after surgical removal of impacted mandibular 3rd molar (M3) by improving periodontal and radiological outcomes when compared with a xenograft, which is commercially available. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. How does the clinical efficacy of ADG compare to xenografts, regarding wound healing and periodontal parameters at the distal aspect of periodontally compromised mandibular M2 following impacted M3 extraction? 2. How does the radiological bone regeneration at ADG-grafted sites differ from that at xenograft-grafted sites? 3. How do the post-operative patient-reported outcomes at sites receiving ADG differ from those at sites receiving xenografts? Researchers will compare ADG to xenograft to see if ADG is more efficacious in managing periodontal defects on distal aspect of M2 after surgical removal of M3. Participants will 1. Undergo bilateral surgical removal of M3 under general anaesthesia 2. Receive ADG on test site and xenograft on contralateral control site 3. Come back for clinical assessments, wound healing assessments and radiographic assessments for 5 times after the surgery (2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months)

Participants needed: 34
Trial details
Age: 26+Biological sex: AllType: InterventionalSponsor: National University of MalaysiaUpdated: Jan 23, 2026Locations: 1
Eligibility criteria

Adult patients aged 26 years and above who can give informed consent and are sch... [+3]

Smokers [+6]