Comparison of Micromarsupialization and Modified Micromarsupialization for the Management of Mucocoele of Lower Lip: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial
- 166 Downloads
This study was undertaken to compare micromarsupialization and modified micromarsupialization for the management of mucoceles.
Materials and Methods
A prospective randomized clinical study was done on thirty patients having mucocele on lower lip. In Group A (n = 15), micromarsupialization and in Group B (n = 15), modified micromarsupialization technique was used. The outcome variables were duration of surgery, intraoperative pain, postoperative pain, healing and recurrence. t test and p values were used to compare the age, duration of lesion, duration of treatment and time taken for healing. The results were expressed as mean with SD. Statistical significance was established at the p ≤ 0.05 level. Analysis of pain (intraoperative, on 3rd, 7th day), intraoperative bleeding and recurrence was done using Fischer’s exact test (p = 0.875, NS).
The average duration of treatment for Group A was 4.10 ± 0.39 min and for Group B was 5.33 ± 0.2 min. The difference was found to be statistically highly significant (p value ≤0.000). The observed power was 1.000. The difference in the intraoperative and postoperative pain on 3rd and 7th day was not found to be significant as per Fischer’s exact test. The mean time taken for healing of the surgical site in Group A was 7.47 ± 0.64 days and in Group B was 9.87 ± 1.88 days, and the difference was found to be highly significant. The observed power was 0.995.
Modified micromarsupialization appears to be a safe technique for the management of mucoceles. However, in comparison with micromarsupialization, it has a higher operating and healing time.
KeywordsMicromarsupialization Modified micromarsupialization Mucocele Ranula
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
Institutional ethical committee clearance was obtained for the study.
- 21.Muraoka M, Taniguchi T, Harada T (2006) A new conservative treatment for retention cyst of the lip: OK-432 injection. Br J Plast Surg 116:169–172Google Scholar