Postsurgical comparison between a linear flap and a triangular flap in lower third molar surgery. Literature review

Abstract

Introduction. The extraction of lower third molars is a frequent intervention in the practice of oral and maxillofacial surgery. A crucial aspect of the procedure's success is the proper design of the mucoperiosteal flap, which determines optimal exposure, surgical access, and postoperative recovery with minimal complications. Among the most used techniques are linear and triangular flaps, generating a debate about which offers better results. Objective. The purpose of this study is to rigorously compare these two techniques for lower third molar surgery. Methodology. Using the PRISMA methodology, 17 studies that evaluated the use of both types of flaps were reviewed from several databases. Results. The review results showed various findings: some studies found no significant differences between the two flap types, while others highlighted specific advantages for each. Based on the findings, the triangular mucoperiosteal flap is associated with reduced postoperative pain, less incidence of lockjaw, and lower risk of surgical wound dehiscence. On the other hand, the linear flap could contribute to a decrease in inflammation and ecchymosis after surgery. Conclusion. In conclusion, linear and triangular flaps are viable and practical options for extracting lower third molars. The choice between both will depend on the individualized evaluation of the patient, the complexity of the case, and the surgeon's experience, seeking to optimize results and minimize postoperative complications.