The purpose of this study was to compare the envelope flap and triangular flap for impacted lower third molar (M3) extraction and their effects on the periodontal health of adjacent second molars (M2). A population of 60 patients undergoing M3 extraction with the envelope flap (Group A) or triangular flap (Group B) was analyzed, comparing probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and gingival recession (REC) recorded at six sites (disto-lingual, mid-lingual, mesio-lingual, disto-vestibular, mid-vestibular, and mesio-vestibular) before (T0) and 6 months after extraction (T1). There was a statistically significant mean difference in PPD and CAL at two sites, disto-vestibular (dv) and disto-lingual (dl), between values recorded before and 6 months after surgery for either Group A or Group B. Furthermore, for the same periodontal records, at 6 months after surgery, a statistically significant difference was recorded between younger and older patients, implying that the healing process was more beneficial for younger patients. No significant differences were found between the two groups (A and B) in PPDdl, PPDdv, CALdl, and CALdv, confirming that the mucoperiosteal flap design does not influence the periodontal healing process of second molars.
Keywords: oral surgery; periodontitis; third impacted molar; wound healing.