PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 19, 2026European Journal of Orthodontics1 citationsOpen Access

Glass ionomer open exposure and closed exposure of palatally displaced canines: a randomised controlled trail comparing postoperative pain perception and complications

View Full Paper
ADAnna DahlénVTViktoria TagessonDTDamon Taheri

Key Points

  • To compare glass ionomer open exposure with closed exposure regarding postoperative pain and complications in patients with palatally displaced canines.
  • Single centre, randomised controlled trial design
  • Enrollment of patients aged ≤18 years with unilateral palatally displaced canines
  • Random allocation to glass ionomer open exposure or closed exposure
  • Patient-reported outcomes collected daily via telephone until symptom resolution
  • Statistical analyses included repeated measures, Mann–Whitney U-test, chi-square test, and Fisher’s exact test.
  • 83 of 92 patients completed the intervention
  • GOPEX group reported higher pain levels in the first week compared to CE group
  • Pain-free patients percentage and overall pain and analgesic use did not differ between groups over the full period
  • Surgery duration and complications were comparable between groups.

Abstract

Abstract Background The most common surgical interventions for palatally displaced canines (PDCs) are open and closed exposure, yet there is no consensus on which exposure technique is preferable. Objectives To compare glass ionomer open exposure (GOPEX) with closed exposure (CE) in terms of patient-reported outcomes, surgical duration, and complications. Trial design The trial design was a single centre, randomised controlled trial, with a 1:1 allocation of two parallel groups. Methods Patients aged ≤18 years, with a unilateral PDC in sector 2–5, requiring surgical exposure were randomly allocated to GOPEX or CE. Patient-reported outcomes were collected through a questionnaire completed over the phone daily from the day of exposure until symptom resolution. Surgery duration, recorded by the operator, and complications within four weeks, was obtained from the patient’s record. The outcome assessor and the individual conducting the follow-up calls were blinded to group allocation. Repeated measures analyses were used for data collected at multiple time points. Mann–Whitney U-test, chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate was used for other between-group comparisons. Results Of the 92 patients randomised, 83 completed the intervention: 43 in the GOPEX group (13.8 ± 1.5 years) and 40 in the CE group (13.6 ± 1.2 years). Throughout the full postoperative period, the groups did not differ significantly in pain levels, percentage of pain-free patients, analgesic use, or chewing difficulty. During the first postoperative week, however, the GOPEX group reported higher pain (fold change 1.78; 95% CI: 1.07–2.99; P = 0.028). Fewer GOPEX patients were pain-free at one week, and they consumed more analgesics on postoperative days 4 and 5. Surgery duration was similar between groups, and complications were rare and comparable. Conclusions Although the GOPEX group reported more pain during the first postoperative week, overall pain scores and analgesic consumption across the full postoperative period did not differ between groups. No significant differences were found in surgery duration or complications. Trial registration www.researchweb.org/is/sverige, registration number: 279469.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Dahlén et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69bb92be496e729e629804bdhttps://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjag011
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper