Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorMorkel, J.A.
dc.contributor.authorMohamed, Allie
dc.date.accessioned2015-04-30T12:34:00Z
dc.date.available2015-04-30T12:34:00Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11394/4089
dc.descriptionMagister Chirurgiae Dentium - MChDen_US
dc.description.abstractThis study compares the CMN to the steel scalpel by assessing incision time, incisional blood loss, postoperative pain, wound healing, and the incidence of lingual and long buccal nerve injury. Twenty standardised cases were included in an analytical prospective case series. Each case had one side cut with CMN and the other side with steel scalpel. Third molar surgery is the most commonly performed procedure by maxillo-facial and oral surgeons, and is associated with expected but transient sequelae such as pain, swelling and trismus. Modalities to reduce the severity of these sequelae are desirable. Several studies report that the use of conventional electrosurgical instruments and the Colorado Microdissection Needle (CMN) resulted in significant reductions in cutting time, incisional blood loss, postoperative pain, with no evidence of increased incidence of wound complications such as dehiscence and infection.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of the Western Capeen_US
dc.subjectThird Molaren_US
dc.subjectSteel Scalpelen_US
dc.subjectColorado Microdissection Needleen_US
dc.titleColorado microdissection needle versus cold steel scalpel for incisions in third molar surgeryen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.rights.holderUniversity of the Western Capeen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record