'Propolis Versus Chlorhexidine Gluconate on Wound Healing After Third Molar Surgery: a Randomized Controlled Trial'

NCT07364253 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: 2020/3-4
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 52
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

The goal of this study is to examine the effects of propolis gargle on wound healing following third molar surgery and to compare it with chlorhexidine gluconate. The main question it aims to answer is: Is propolis-containing gargle safe and effective alternative to chlorhexidine gluconate following impacted third molar surgery? Does propolis demonstrate comparable outcomes in pain control and mouth opening ?

Conditions

Third Molar Surgery; Post Operative Analgesia

Keywords

third molar surgery; propolis gargle; chlorhexidine gluconate

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• Edema

  Edema (assessed by measuring the distances between the tragus and lip corner, as well as the outer corner of the eye and mandibular corner, with measurements taken twice using a paper ruler and averaged), It was measured before surgery, after surgery second and seventh days.

  Before surgery to after surgery seventh day

• Pain after surgery

  Patient records were collected on the second and seventh days post-operation. The evaluated parameters included pain (measured using the VAS scale). Visual analog scale is used to measure pain intensity. It consists of a straight line usually 10 cm. 0: no pain, 10: worst pain imaginable. The patient marks the point that best represents their pain.

  After surgery, post- op second and seventh day

Secondary Outcomes (2)

• Maximum mouth opening

  Before surgery to post surgery seventh day

• Wound aperture

  From surgery to seventh day after surgery

Study Arms (2)

Propolis gargle

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Patients were randomly allocated into two groups: one group used 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate gargle, while the other used a 3% propolis-containing gargle. Gargles were applied twice daily for one minute from postoperative day 2 to day 7. Pain was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), while edema, maximum mouth opening, wound healing, and postoperative complications were assessed preoperatively and on postoperative days 2 and 7.

Procedure: Third molar Surgery with propolis gargle

Chlorhexidine Gluconate gargle

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Patients were randomly allocated into two groups: one group used 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate gargle, while the other used a 3% propolis-containing gargle. Gargles were applied twice daily for one minute from postoperative day 2 to day 7. Pain was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), while edema, maximum mouth opening, wound healing, and postoperative complications were assessed preoperatively and on postoperative days 2 and 7.

Procedure: Third molar surgery with chlorhexidine gluconate

Interventions

Third molar Surgery with propolis gargle PROCEDURE

The patients were anesthetized with inferior alveolar, lingual, and buccal nerve blocks using 4 ml of articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (Ultracaine D-S Fort, Aventis). The tooth could be observed by elevating a full-thickness triangular mucoperiosteal flap. The tooth was extracted following an osteotomy using a bur. The tooth was sectioned and extracted, if required. Curettage was conducted in the presence of a residual dental follicle. The wound was sutured with silk thread. All procedures were conducted by the same physician. Postoperatively, antibiotics (amoxicillin combined with clavulanic acid, 2 g daily for 5 days) and analgesics (paracetamol 1 g, up to 4 times daily for 3 days) were recommended. The group was administered a 3% propolis gargle (formulated in an ethanol solution, twice daily for 1 minute, prepared in the Departments of Pharmacology.

Propolis gargle

Third molar surgery with chlorhexidine gluconate PROCEDURE

The patients were anesthetized with inferior alveolar, lingual, and buccal nerve blocks using 4 ml of articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (Ultracaine D-S Fort, Aventis). The tooth could be observed by elevating a full-thickness triangular mucoperiosteal flap. The tooth was extracted following an osteotomy using a bur. The tooth was sectioned and extracted, if required. Curettage was conducted in the presence of a residual dental follicle. The wound was sutured with silk thread. All procedures were conducted by the same physician. Postoperatively, antibiotics (amoxicillin combined with clavulanic acid, 2 g daily for 5 days) and analgesics (paracetamol 1 g, up to 4 times daily for 3 days) were recommended. The group was administered chlorhexidine gluconate (0.12%) gargle, twice daily for 1 minute.

Chlorhexidine Gluconate gargle

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Clinical diagnosis of the impacted teeth were classified as Class II level B mesioangular position
• Patients from a socioeconomic level who can actively use postoperative gargles

You may not qualify if:

• Individuals with third molars exhibiting acute infection
• smokers
• pregnant women

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Ataturk University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Ataturk University Faculty of Dentistry

Erzurum, Yakutiye, 25240, Turkey (Türkiye)

Location

MeSH Terms

Interventions

chlorhexidine gluconate

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Associate Professor

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: January 16, 2026
• First Posted: January 23, 2026
• Study Start: January 5, 2021
• Primary Completion: June 3, 2021
• Study Completion: January 7, 2022
• Last Updated: February 2, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-01

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

TU (1)