Efficacy of 45-Degree Turbine Handpiece Versus Conventional Motor Handpiece in Surgical Removal of Impacted Third Molar: A Comparative Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the efficacy of the conventional motor handpiece and the 45-degree turbine handpiece in the surgical removal of impacted third molars, with a focus on operative time, pain, swelling, trismus, and the risk of subcutaneous emphysema. METHODS: A total of 240 patients were randomly assigned into two groups: Group A (n = 120) underwent surgery using the conventional motor handpiece, while Group B (n = 120) used the 45-degree turbine handpiece. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated on days 3, 7, and 30, including pain (VAS score), swelling (C-T and O-A measurements), and trismus (mouth opening). RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in operative time between the two groups (P = 0.871). However, Group B demonstrated lower pain scores on day 7 (P = 0.03) and faster resolution of swelling and trismus by day 30 compared to Group A. The risk of subcutaneous emphysema was higher in Group B, though complications were minimal. CONCLUSION: The 45-degree turbine handpiece offers advantages in terms of reduced postoperative pain, swelling, and faster recovery of mouth opening compared to the conventional motor handpiece. However, the risk of subcutaneous emphysema necessitates caution when using the turbine handpiece in impacted third molar surgery.