Parâmetros clínicos e bioquímicos salivares após dois protocolos preemptivos da dexametasona na remoção dos terceiros molares em mulheres

• Autor(a) principal: Costa, Monique Gonçalves da [UNESP]
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/217909
• topic: Dexamethasone; Cirurgia bucal; Dexametasona; Saliva; Enzinas

Preemptive therapy improves the patient's quality of life after removal of third molars, however there is no consensus on the most efficient preemptive protocol. The objective was to compare two preemptive protocols of dexamethasone (DEXA) with respect to clinical parameters (edema, trismus and pain), salivary flow (FS) and salivary biochemical parameters: pH, buffering capacity (CT), total protein (PT), phosphatase total alkaline (FAL), total acid phosphatase (FAT), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P). This randomized, double-blind, split-mouth clinical study was carried out with eight women, with a mean age of 20.89 years, without local and systemic health problems, who required bilateral upper and lower third molar extractions. Each patient had bilateral surgical removals in two parts, with an interval of 20 days between preparations. In each procedure, a preemptive protocol was used randomly: preoperative oral DEXA at the usual dose, 8 mg, 1 hour before surgery (control group) and the usual fractional dose, 4 mg, 8 and 1 hour before surgery (group experimental) All volunteers signed an informed consent form (CAAE 44625815.8.0000.5420). Clinical parameters were measured in the immediate preoperative period and in the 2 and 7 day postoperative period. In the same periods, the total unstimulated saliva was collected by the sputum method between 2:00 pm to 4:00 pm. After processing, the aliquots of the supernatant were stored at -80 ° C until their analysis by spectrophotometric methods. Preemptive protocols were compared with each other using Student's t test (p < 0,05). To compare the results before surgery and in the postoperative period of each preemptive protocol, an ANOVA statistical analysis was used, followed by the Tukey test (parametric data) and the Kruskal Wallis test followed by Dunn's post hoc multiple comparisons test (nonparametric). We did not observe any statistically significant changes in clinical and biochemical salivary parameters between the two preemptive protocols in any period evaluated. We conclude that patients can be submitted to both preemptive protocols without significant differences in clinical and biochemical salivary parameters. significant differences in clinical and biochemical salivary parameters.