Purpose: To compare the efficacy, advantages and disadvantages of the use of preoperative injection of methylprednisolone into masseter muscle versus gluteal muscle to minimize postoperative swelling after the surgical removal of lower third molar.
Materials and methods: A prospective randomized study was planned comprising of 10 subjects, undergoing elective surgery for bilateral impacted lower third molar removal with similar severity index. The subjects were randomly assigned into two groups-group I who received intrabuccal masseteric injection and group II who received gluteal injection of 40 mg of methylprednisolone after inferior alveolar nerve and long buccal nerve block (prior to the surgical removal of the impacted lower third molars). We evaluated the postoperative pain, trismus, swelling, advantages and disadvantages of the injection techniques. Statistical analysis was done using student t test.
Results: Ten patients of mean age 27 ± 6 years were selected for the study including six males and four females. The mean age was 27 years (SD 6). The differences in measurements of preoperative and postoperative pain, swelling and mouth opening between group I and group II were not statistically significant.
Conclusion: The study evidently proves that there is no statistically significant difference between the intrabuccal approach of masseteric injection and gluteal injection of methylprednisolone in terms of pain, swelling and trismus following surgical removal of impacted lower third molars. However, the intrabuccal approach of masseteric injection was found to be more convenient when compared to gluteal injection, for the surgeon as well as the patient. It also has an additional advantage of being a painless steroidal injection on an anesthetized injection site.
Keywords: Gluteal muscle and impacted third molar; Masseter muscle; Steroids.