Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket)

Investigation of alveolar osteitis and the effectiveness of laser treatment: a unified Meta-analysis and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Post-tooth extraction, dry socket is a frequently encountered complication, causing substantial pain and hindering the healing process. Conventional approaches to manage this condition have traditionally involved the use of antiseptic dressings to diminish bacterial presence and facilitate healing. This study aims to assess the efficacy of laser therapy in the symptomatic treatment of alveolitis.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Science, focusing on publications from 1998 to 31/01/2024 using relevant keywords. The combination of "laser" and "dry socket" was executed through the boolean connection AND.

RESULTS

At the conclusion of the study, a total of 50 studies were identified across the three search engines, with only three selected for the current systematic study and meta-analysis. The meta-analysis indicated that laser treatment proves effective in addressing alveolitis compared to Alvogyl. However, the correlation between the two was not highly significant.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that laser therapy may serve as a viable alternative to traditional treatments for dry socket. This minimally invasive procedure has the potential to alleviate pain and promote healing with fewer associated side effects."

Comparaison of Efficacy and Safety of Fentanyl Transdermal Patch with Oral Ketorolac for Pain Management in Dry Socket: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of transdermal Fentanyl patch with oral Ketorolac for pain management in dry socket patients.

Study design

Sixty patients who were diagnosed with dry socket (VAS > 40 mm) were recruited in this prospective randomized controlled trial. Patients were divided into two groups. Group1 (n = 30) Transdermal Fentanyl patch (25mcg/hr) was given and in Group 2 (n = 30) Ketorolac 10 mg Oral tablet was prescribed for pain management. The primary endpoint was the mean pain scores within 72 h evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS). Secondary measures included the safety and tolerability, amount of rescue medication (analgesic and antiemetic) and effectiveness of treatment interventions by Brief Pain Inventory Questionnaire (BPI).

Results

The mean VAS pain scores were significantly less in group 1 (Fentanyl) as compared to group 2 (ketorolac) on all follow-up days. Significant difference was noted in the mean amount of rescue analgesic medication. It was 2.16 + 1.53 in group 1 and 8.50 + 3.98 in group 2. Side effects were seen in both the groups. Nausea (46%) and vomiting (43%) were reported in group 1 while headache (36.6%) and epigastric pain (53.3%) in group 2.

Conclusions

Thus, transdermal Fentanyl was better in pain control than Ketorolac with less need for rescue analgesic medication in dry socket.

Investigation of the clinical efficacy of CGF and ozone in the management of alveolar osteitis: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy of concentrated growth factors (CGF) and ozone in the treatment of alveolar osteitis (AO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients admitted for the treatment of AO and eligible for the study were included and divided into control, ozone, and CGF + ozone groups. For the treatment of AO alveogyl, ozone, and CGF + ozone were applied to control, ozone, and CGF + ozone groups, respectively, and repeated on 3rd day. Demographic data and oral hygiene were recorded at the initial visit. Pain with visual analog scale (VAS) and analgesic consumption were evaluated at the 6th and 24th h, and on 2nd-7th days. Granulation tissue health and inflammation severity were evaluated on the 1st, 3rd, and 7th days. Quality of life was evaluated with the postoperative symptom severity scale (Posse) on the 7th day.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients (43 females/17 males; mean age 42.7 ± 13.76 years), 20 patients per group were included. Among the groups, pain scores on the 7th day (p = 0.042), granulation tissue health on the 3rd (p = 0.003) and 7th (p = 0.015) days showed a significant difference while analgesic consumption, Posse scores, and inflammation severity showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Between genders analgesic consumption at 6 h (p = 0.027), 24 h (p = 0.033), and on the 2nd day (p = 0.034) and inflammation severity on the 7th day (p = 0.012) showed significant differences while Posse scores and granulation tissue health showed no significant differences (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that regenerative treatment which modulates angiogenesis, and tissue regeneration by stimulating stem cells, growth factors, and cytokines with CGF + ozone are more effective than conventional treatment regarding AO.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Usage of CGF and ozone together provides faster and more satisfactory management of AO.

Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket)

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a complication of dental extractions more often involving mandibular molar teeth. It is associated with severe pain developing 2 to 3 days postoperatively with or without halitosis, a socket that may be partially or totally devoid of a blood clot, and increased postoperative visits. This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2012.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of local interventions used for the prevention and treatment of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) following tooth extraction.

SEARCH METHODS

An Information Specialist searched four bibliographic databases up to 28 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of adults over 18 years of age who were having permanent teeth extracted or who had developed dry socket postextraction. We included studies with any type of local intervention used for the prevention or treatment of dry socket, compared to a different local intervention, placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies reporting on systemic use of antibiotics or the use of surgical techniques because these interventions are evaluated in separate Cochrane Reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We followed Cochrane statistical guidelines and reported dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For some of the split-mouth studies with sparse data, it was not possible to calculate RR so we calculated the exact odds ratio (OR) instead. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 trials with 6771 participants; 39 trials (with 6219 participants) investigated prevention of dry socket and 10 studies (with 552 participants) looked at the treatment of dry socket. 16 studies were at high risk of bias, 30 studies at unclear risk of bias, and 3 studies at low risk of bias. Chlorhexidine in the prevention of dry socket When compared to placebo, rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinses (0.12% and 0.2% concentrations) both before and 24 hours after extraction(s) substantially reduced the risk of developing dry socket with an OR of 0.38 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.58; P < 0.00001; 6 trials, 1547 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The prevalence of dry socket varies from 1% to 5% in routine dental extractions to upwards of 30% in surgically extracted third molars. The number of patients needed to be treated (NNT) with chlorhexidine rinse to prevent one patient having dry socket was 162 (95% CI 155 to 240), 33 (95% CI 27 to 49), and 7 (95% CI 5 to 10) for control prevalence of dry socket 0.01, 0.05, and 0.30 respectively.  Compared to placebo, placing chlorhexidine gel intrasocket after extractions reduced the odds of developing a dry socket by 58% with an OR of 0.44 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.71; P = 0.0008; 7 trials, 753 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The NNT with chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) to prevent one patient developing dry socket was 180 (95% CI 137 to 347), 37 (95% CI 28 to 72), and 7 (95% CI 5 to 15) for control prevalence of dry socket of 0.01, 0.05, and 0.30 respectively. Compared to chlorhexidine rinse (0.12%), placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) intrasocket after extractions was not superior in reducing the risk of dry socket (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.20; P = 0.22; 2 trials, 383 participants; low-certainty evidence).  The present review found some evidence for the association of minor adverse reactions with use of 0.12%, 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthrinses (alteration in taste, staining of teeth, stomatitis) though most studies were not designed explicitly to detect the presence of hypersensitivity reactions to mouthwash as part of the study protocol. No adverse events were reported in relation to the use of 0.2% chlorhexidine gel placed directly into a socket. Platelet rich plasma in the prevention of dry socket  Compared to placebo, placing platelet rich plasma after extractions was not superior in reducing the risk of having a dry socket (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.33; P = 0.17; 2 studies, 127 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  A further 21 intrasocket interventions to prevent dry socket were each evaluated in single studies, and there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects. Zinc oxide eugenol versus Alvogyl in the treatment of dry socket Two studies, with 80 participants, showed that Alvogyl (old formulation) is more effective than zinc oxide eugenol at reducing pain at day 7 (mean difference (MD) -1.40, 95% CI -1.75 to -1.04; P < 0.00001; 2 studies, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence) A further nine interventions for the treatment of dry socket were evaluated in single studies, providing insufficient evidence to determine their effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tooth extractions are generally undertaken by dentists for a variety of reasons, however, all but five studies included in the present review included participants undergoing extraction of third molars, most of which were undertaken by oral surgeons. There is moderate-certainty evidence that rinsing with chlorhexidine (0.12% and 0.2%) or placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) in the sockets of extracted teeth, probably results in a reduction in dry socket. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the other 21 preventative interventions each evaluated in single studies. There was limited evidence of very low certainty that Alvogyl (old formulation) may reduce pain at day 7 in patients with dry socket when compared to zinc oxide eugenol.

Previous dry socket as a risk factor for alveolar osteitis: A nested case-control study in primary healthcare services

Background

Dry socket is one of the most common complications following tooth extraction, though no studies have been made on its main risk factors in the primary healthcare services of Barcelona (Spain). Objectives: To analyze the influence of different factors upon the appearance of dry socket in patients attended in the primary care setting, and to determine the possible presence of risk factors in patients who have suffered a previous episode of dry socket.

Material and Methods

During 24 months, questionnaires were filled with data on the patients seen in different public primary healthcare services in the area of Barcelona (Spain). A case-control study was conducted to identify the main risk factors for developing complications in the form of dry socket.

Results

A mandibular location of the extracted tooth, poor oral hygiene, difficult extraction, and previous dry socket increased the risk of developing this complication. In patients with dry socket in the past, the risk of developing the same complication again, adjusted for difficulty of extraction, was seen to increase 11.45-fold (OR: 11.45; 95%CI: 1.06 to 123.74; p = 0.045).

Conclusions

The risk factors for dry socket are a mandibular location of the extracted tooth, poor oral hygiene, difficult extraction, and particularly a history of dry socket in the past. The identification of these factors the prevention of dry socket in each patient could be improved.

Key words:Dry socket, risk factors, extraction, complications.

[Prevention of inflammatory complications after surgical extraction of mandibular third molars]

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory complications are the most prevalent problems after surgical extraction of mandibular third molars. The main options for prevention are prophylactic antibiotics usage before surgery or in the postoperative period; a method of postoperative management of a tooth socket, implying healing by primary or secondary closure. Each of the postoperative management types has advantages and disadvantages.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to compare complete suturing versus iodoform gauze packing of tooth socket for prevention of inflammatory complications after mandibular third molar removal.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed. The medical records of 273 patients who underwent mandibular third molar extraction for orthodontic indications were analyzed. Data of 100 patients were included, in 50 cases the postoperative management was carried out using iodoform packing, in other 50 cases complete suturing was performed. Depending on the type of data and distribution, we used the chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test. A p<0.05 was needed to achieve statistical significance.

RESULTS

Alveolitis developed in 8 % cases of iodoform gauze packing and 34% cases of suturing. The differences are statistically significant (p=0.003). The total rehabilitation period (days) in patients with no alveolitis using iodoform gauze packing was 8 (7; 31) (Me (Q1; Q3)), using complete socket suturing was 7 (7; 8) (Me (Q1; Q3)), the differences are statistically significant (p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

The best option for the prophylaxis of alveolitis after surgical extraction of mandibular third molar is secondary closure using iodoform gauze packing. However, in the cases with no alveolitis when complete suturing was performed, healing occurred much faster, which justifies the development of an alternative method for third molar socket healing.

Aetiology, Prevention and Management of Alveolar Osteitis-A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (AO) is a poorly understood, common, painful complication following exodontia. It is sometimes managed by inappropriate prescription of antibiotics which contributes to the global threat of antimicrobial resistance. Use of intra-alveolar chlorhexidine also presents a serious risk of anaphylaxis to the patient.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to investigate the aetiology, prevention and management of AO and highlight the extent of inappropriate prescribing and intra-alveolar chlorhexidine use.

DESIGN

A scoping review was undertaken using the PRISMA guidelines. Medline, Ovid and Pubmed were searched between 2010 and 2020, from which 63 studies were selected for review that related to the aetiology, prevention or management of AO. Data were analysed for frequency of studies reporting information on risk factors for aetiology, prevention strategies and management including inappropriate management using antibiotic prescribing and intra-alveolar chlorhexidine.

RESULTS

Impaired immune response, surgical technique and age were identified as significant factors in the development of AO, while there is conflicting evidence regarding the effects of smoking and gender. With regard to prevention, the use of prophylactic antibiotics is not supported within the literature. Saline irrigation and eugenol pastes used preventively have been shown to be cheap and effective alternatives to chlorhexidine with no adverse effects. Hyaluronic acid and low-level laser therapies showed a significant reduction in pain and soft-tissue inflammation in the management of AO compared to Alveogyl.

CONCLUSIONS

Further understanding of the pathophysiology of AO is needed, in addition to large high-quality RCTs or long-term observational studies into the aetiology, prevention, and management of AO to produce up-to-date evidence-based clinical guidelines. Clinicians should also be mindful of their contribution to growing antimicrobial resistance and avoid inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics. Saline should replace chlorhexidine as the intra-alveolar irrigant of choice.

Initial Observation of Factors Interfering with the Treatment of Alveolar Osteitis Using Hyaluronic Acid with Octenidine-A Series of Case Reports

Alveolar osteitis (AO) is a common complication following the extraction of the teeth, particularly the lower third molars. It starts within a few days after the extraction and manifests mainly as pain in the extraction site. Several strategies of treatment are available in order to relieve pain and heal the extraction wound. Recently, a novel medical device combining hyaluronic acid (HA) and octenidine (OCT) was introduced for the treatment of AO. This series of case reports aims to summarize the initial clinical experiences with this new device and to highlight factors possibly interfering with this treatment. The medical documentation of five patients with similar initial situations treated for AO with HA + OCT device was analyzed in detail. Smoking and previous treatment with Alveogyl (Septodont, Saint-Maur-des-Fossés, France) were identified as factors interfering with the AO treatment with the HA + OCT device. In three patients without these risk factors, the treatment led to recovery within two or three days. The patient pretreated with Alveogyl and the smoker required six and seven applications of the HA + OCT device, respectively. According to these initial observations, it seems smoking and previous treatment with Alveogyl prolong the treatment of AO using the HA + OCT device that, in turn, shows a rapid effect if these risk factors are not present.

Application of propolis extract, nanovitamin C and nanovitamin E to prevent alveolar osteitis after impacted lower third molar surgery. A randomized, double-blind, split-mouth, pilot study

BACKGROUND

Propolis has anti-inflammatory, analgesic and healing properties. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a gel containing 2% of propolis extract, 0.2% of ascorbic acid and 0.2% of tocopherol acetate is effective in preventing surgical complications related to impacted lower third molar extractions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, split-mouth study was performed. Fifteen patients were recruited who needed bilateral impacted lower third molar extractions with a similar surgical difficulty. A test or placebo gel was administered randomly inside post-extraction sockets. Each patient was instructed to apply the gel 3 times/day in the surgical wound for a week. After a month, the contralateral third molar was extracted, and the opposite gel applied. The following parameters were diagnosed/evaluated and then recorded: alveolar osteitis following Blum's criteria, swelling and trismus at day one, two, three and seven post-intervention, wound healing at day 7 post-intervention, and postoperative pain using a visual analog scale, as well as, the number of analgesic pill intake.

RESULTS

A total of twenty-six surgical procedures were performed in 13 patients (mean age 20.67±2 years). Alveolar osteitis was reported in 3 patients from the placebo group (23.1%) and none in the test group (0%) (p=0.25). No statistically significant differences were reported in swelling, trismus, wound healing or analgesic pill consumption between two groups. But statistically lower postoperative pain during the 7 days after surgical extractions was found according to visual analog scale in test group compared to the placebo group (p=0.007). No side effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of this gel may be effective in preventing alveolitis and thus reducing postoperative pain after impacted third molar extractions. More randomized clinical trials with larger sample are needed to confirm these results.

Antibiotics to prevent complications following tooth extractions

BACKGROUND

The most frequent indications for tooth extractions, generally performed by general dental practitioners, are dental caries and periodontal infections. Systemic antibiotics may be prescribed to patients undergoing extractions to prevent complications due to infection. This is an update of a review first published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis on the prevention of infectious complications following tooth extractions.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register (to 16 April 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2020, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 16 April 2020), Embase Ovid (1980 to 16 April 2020), and LILACS (1982 to 16 April 2020). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing tooth extraction(s) for any indication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently performed data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment for the included studies. We contacted trial authors for further details where these were unclear. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For continuous outcomes, we used mean differences (MD) with 95% CI using random-effects models. We examined potential sources of heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for key outcomes as high, moderate, low, or very low, using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 trials that randomised approximately 3206 participants (2583 analysed) to prophylactic antibiotics or placebo. Although general dentists perform dental extractions because of severe dental caries or periodontal infection, only one of the trials evaluated the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in groups of patients affected by those clinical conditions. We assessed 16 trials as being at high risk of bias, three at low risk, and four as unclear.  Compared to placebo, antibiotics may reduce the risk of postsurgical infectious complications in patients undergoing third molar extractions by approximately 66% (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64; 1728 participants; 12 studies; low-certainty evidence), which means that 19 people (95% CI 15 to 34) need to be treated with antibiotics to prevent one infection following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. Antibiotics may also reduce the risk of dry socket by 34% (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97; 1882 participants; 13 studies; low-certainty evidence), which means that 46 people (95% CI 29 to 62) need to take antibiotics to prevent one case of dry socket following extraction of impacted wisdom teeth. The evidence for our other outcomes is uncertain: pain, whether measured dichotomously as presence or absence (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.12; 675 participants; 3 studies) or continuously using a visual analogue scale (0-to-10-centimetre scale, where 0 is no pain) (MD -0.26, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.07; 422 participants; 4 studies); fever (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.79; 475 participants; 4 studies); and adverse effects, which were mild and transient (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.64; 1277 participants; 8 studies) (very low-certainty evidence).  We found no clear evidence that the timing of antibiotic administration (preoperative, postoperative, or both) was important. The included studies enrolled a subset of patients undergoing dental extractions, that is healthy people who had surgical extraction of third molars. Consequently, the results of this review may not be generalisable to all people undergoing tooth extractions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority (21 out of 23) of the trials included in this review included only healthy patients undergoing extraction of impacted third molars, often performed by oral surgeons. None of the studies evaluated tooth extraction in immunocompromised patients. We found low-certainty evidence that prophylactic antibiotics may reduce the risk of infection and dry socket following third molar extraction when compared to placebo, and very low-certainty evidence of no increase in the risk of adverse effects. On average, treating 19 healthy patients with prophylactic antibiotics may stop one person from getting an infection. It is unclear whether the evidence in this review is generalisable to patients with concomitant illnesses or patients at a higher risk of infection. Due to the increasing prevalence of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotic treatment, clinicians should evaluate if and when to prescribe prophylactic antibiotic therapy before a dental extraction for each patient on the basis of the patient's clinical conditions (healthy or affected by systemic pathology) and level of risk from infective complications. Immunocompromised patients, in particular, need an individualised approach in consultation with their treating medical specialist.

Current uses of chlorhexidine for management of oral disease: a narrative review

OBJECTIVES

Chlorhexidine (CHX) is a commonly used antiseptic mouthwash, used by dental practitioners and the public, due to its antimicrobial effects. The aim of this article was to provide a narrative review of current antimicrobial uses of CHX relevant to dentistry in the context of oral diseases, highlighting need for further studies to support its safe and appropriate use.

STUDY SELECTION, DATA AND SOURCES

Randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews and national (UK and US) guidelines were consulted where available, with search terms for each subject category entered into MEDLINE, PubMed, Google Scholar and the Cochrane database.

RESULTS

Some evidence existed to support adjunctive short-term use of CHX to manage dental plaque, and reduce clinical symptoms of gingivitis, dry socket, as well as reduce aerosolisation of bacteria. However, use must be weighed alongside the less desirable effects of CHX, including extrinsic staining of teeth, antimicrobial resistance to antiseptic agents and the rare, but fatal, allergic reactions to CHX. Conversely, evidence for the effectiveness of chlorhexidine to manage or prevent periodontitis, dental caries, necrotising periodontal diseases, peri-implantitis, and infections associated with extraction and aerosolised viruses remains less certain.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of CHX in dentistry and oral healthcare continues to be widespread and thus it is important that dental practitioners understand that, based on its differential mechanisms of action on different microbes, appropriate clinical and dental use of CHX should be oral disease specific. However, further scientific and clinical research is required before full recommendations can be made.

Effectiveness of dexamethasone injection in the pterygomandibular space before and after lower third molar surgery

Background

Previous studies have investigated the effects of dexamethasone injections into the pterygomandibular space and compared them to those of controls; however, the effects of dexamethasone injections before and after lower third molar surgery on postoperative complications have not been studied. This research investigated the postoperative sequelae of dexamethasone injections before and after surgery into the pterygomandibular space. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of preoperative and postoperative injections of 4 mg of dexamethasone into the pterygomandibular space on postoperative pain, facial swelling, and the restriction of mouth opening following lower third molar surgical removal.

Methods

Twenty-seven participants with bilateral symmetrical lower impacted third molars were included in this study. Each participant was randomly allocated to one of two groups. Group A received injections of 1 ml dexamethasone (4 mg/mL) and 1 mL placebo into the pterygomandibular space before and after surgery, respectively. Group B received the same doses of placebo before surgery and dexamethasone after surgery.

Results

A significant restriction of mouth opening on the second postoperative day was observed in both groups. Nonetheless, the postoperative restriction of mouth opening, facial swelling, postoperative pain, and analgesic consumption after lower third molar surgical removal were not significantly different in the two groups.

Conclusions

Regardless of the time of administration, dexamethasone injections into the pterygomandibular space resulted in satisfactory control of the postoperative sequelae of the mandibular third molar surgical removal.

Cytotoxicity and Gene Expression Changes of a Novel Homeopathic Antiseptic Oral Rinse in Comparison to Chlorhexidine in Gingival Fibroblasts

Most available antiseptic solutions available today have strong antibacterial effects, however most also possess major cytotoxic effects on human gingival tissues. The VEGA Oral Care Recovery Kit (StellaLife), previously evaluated in clinical studies, consists of 16 active ingredients that are monographed in the Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of United States (HPUS) and recognized for their accelerated healing properties (reduction in post-op pain). The aim of this study was to compare VEGA to chlorhexidine (CHX) in vitro on gingival fibroblast viability, survival at various concentrations, migration assay, proliferation activity, expression of both regenerative growth factors as well as inflammatory markers, and collagen synthesis. A 10-fold dilution of standard CHX (0.02%) led to cell death, whereas cell viability was significantly better in the VEGA group for all tested parameters. Furthermore, VEGA also induced significantly greater fibroblast migration and proliferation. CHX negatively impacted the cellular inflammatory response of gingival fibroblasts, and also led to a reduction in collagen synthesis (50% decrease). Findings from the present study provide support from basic laboratory experiments that validate the previous clinical studies supporting the use of the VEGA oral rinse on its superior biocompatibility and wound healing properties when compared to CHX.

The Efficacy of Concentrated Growth Factor in the Healing of Alveolar Osteitis: A Clinical Study

Background

A dry socket also referred to as alveolar osteitis (AO) is a common postoperative complication following tooth extraction, due to the disruption of the clot within the wound. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of concentrated growth factor (CGF) in the healing of alveolar osteitis following tooth extraction.

Methods

The study was conducted at University Dental Hospital Sharjah, UAE. Patients undergoing tooth extraction at the oral surgery clinic were advised to return immediately if they suffer from pain. Over the following first week after tooth extraction, patients who reported pain symptoms were recalled and all dry sockets were identified. The patients were divided into two groups. Group I patients received conventional treatment with socket curettage and saline irrigation only, while in group II CGF was inserted into the socket. Both groups were observed for pain score and quantification of granulation tissue formation.

Results

A total of 40 dry socket patients, aged between 18 and 60 years, from a total of 1,250 patients, were included in the study. 30 patients were given conventional treatment while another 10 patients were given CGF. Patients who received CGF had a pain score of 7-10 at presentation, and the pain score dropped to 0-3 on day 4 and further improved to 0-1 on day 7 (p = 0.001). Granulation tissue formation appeared in the conventional group I on day 7 while the CGF group II showed earlier granulation tissue formation by day 4 (p = 0.001). The posttreatment pain score is inversely proportional to the amount and rate of granulation tissue formation in the socket.

Conclusion

The study suggests that delivery of CGF into a dry socket helps relieve pain and expedite the wound healing process as shown by a statistically much lower pain score and earlier and more rapid formation of granulation tissue when compared to the conventional alveolar osteitis therapy.

Comparative Analysis of Blood Clot, Plasma Rich in Growth Factors and Platelet-Rich Fibrin Resistance to Bacteria-Induced Fibrinolysis

Alveolar osteitis (AO) is a common, painful postoperative complication after tooth extraction. Fibrinolytic activity in the extraction socket is one etiological factor. Platelet concentrates are used to prevent and treat AO. The aim of this study was to find out whether the positive effect of platelet concentrates can be related to resistance to bacteria-induced fibrinolysis. Blood from 45 human volunteers was used to prepare four media: blood clot medium as control group; PRF and PRGF first fraction (PRGF I) and PRGF second fraction (PRGF II) as study groups. Additionally, collected blood was used for blood plasma preparation on which evaluation of initial value of d-dimer concentration was performed. A solution of five different microbes (Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes, Streptococcus pneumonia, Bacillus cereus, and Candida albicans) was adjusted to 0.5 McFarland (1 × 10⁸ CFU/mL) and then diluted to 0.25 McFarland (0.5 × 10⁸ CFU/mL). The d-dimer concentration was evaluated after one and three hours of bacteria exposure. The resistance to fibrinolysis was not statistically distinguished among any media groups at any time. S. pneumoniae was statistically active in PRF after three hours. C. albicans was statistically active in PRGF II after one hour and in PRF between the first and third hour and after three hours. S. aureus and B. cereus were statistically active in PRGF II after three hours. S. pyogenes was statistically active after one hour, between the first and third hour, and after the third hour in all groups. S. pyogenes was the most active bacterium. Different blood formulations were not distinguishable based on resistance to bacteria-induced fibrinolysis. Low fibrinolytic properties of the found major microbes suggests that bacteria-induced fibrinolysis is one of the leading causes of absence of a clot in a post-extraction socket to be clinically insignificant. The initial absence of a clot or its mechanical elimination during formation or the healing period are major causes of dry socket.

Preservation of alveolar ridge after tooth extraction with hypoxia-inducible factor-1α protein in a dog model

Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-1α protein, which is upregulated by hypoxia, serves an important role in angiogenesis during osteogenesis. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of HIF-1α on alveolar ridge preservation in a dog tooth extraction model. Six beagle dogs were used in the present study. The second and fourth premolar teeth of the lower jaws on both sides were extracted. Two unilateral extraction sockets were randomly selected and filled with Bio-Oss and Bio-Oss + HIF-1α. The contralateral sockets remained unfilled and served as the negative control. Micro-computed tomography examination and histological staining were performed to examine the difference of new bone formation among the three groups. Western blotting and reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis were used to detect the expression levels of osteogenesis- and angiogenesis-associated genes in the bone tissues of the three groups. Twelve weeks post-surgery, trabecular bone formation in the Bio-Oss + HIF-1α group was significantly increased compared with the other groups. The expression levels of osteogenesis-associated genes (runt-related transcription factor 2, osteoblast-specific transcription factor osterix and osteocalcin) and angiogenesis-associated genes (HIF-1α and vascular endothelial growth factor) were all significantly increased in the Bio-Oss + HIF-1α group compared with the other two groups (P<0.05). The present results indicated that Bio-Oss with HIF-1α can promote osteogenesis and angiogenesis in vivo and may be used as an effective treatment for the preservation of the alveolar ridge.

The use of chlorhexidine in the prevention of alveolar osteitis after third molar extractions

Data sourcesCochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline through PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, ISI Web of Science, Evidence-Based Dentistry, ClinicalTrials.gov, the European Union Clinical Trials Register, the Spanish General University Board database of doctoral theses in Spain (TESEO), the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) bibliographic databases, and the Spanish Medical Index (IME).Study selectionRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) (with or without placebo) of patients of any age or gender who underwent maxillary or mandibular third molar extractions. Studies were required to have analysed the efficacy of only chlorhexidine in any concentration, formulation or treatment regimen for preventing alveolar osteitis (AO). There was no language restriction.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction was carried out independently by two researchers, and a third researcher was consulted in case of disagreements. When explicit data were not stated in the text, they were calculated using data from the tables where possible. In addition, authors were contacted to obtain any necessary missing information. Datasets were assessed for heterogeneity, and meta-analysis was conducted on homogenous datasets. Publication bias was assessed through funnel plots. The research was conducted and is reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.ResultsTwenty-three studies published from 1979 to 2015, corresponding to 18 trials (16 parallel-group and two split-mouth RCTs), that reported on 2,824 third molar extractions (1,458 in experimental group and 1,366 in control group) were included. The overall relative risk (RR) was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.45-0.62; P<.0001). There was evidence of low heterogeneity (I² = 9.3%; P = 0.336 by X² test). The number needed to treat was eight (95% CI, 7-11). There were no differences between chlorhexidine rinse (RR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.47-0.71) and gel (RR = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37-0.60) for the prevention of AO after third molar extractions. Chlorhexidine did not cause more adverse reactions than placebo.ConclusionsThe use of chlorhexidine, in any formulation (rinse or gel), concentration (0.12% or 0.20%), or regimen (before, during and/or after surgery), is efficacious and effective in preventing AO in patients who have undergone third molar extraction. The findings showed that in order to prevent one case of AO, eight patients would have to be treated with chlorhexidine. Chlorhexidine gel was found to be moderately more efficacious than the rinse formulation.

Chlorhexidine for prevention of alveolar osteitis: a randomised clinical trial

Objective

To determine the effectiveness of chlorhexidine 0.12% mouthwash (CHX) after tooth extraction for the prevention of alveolar osteitis (AO).

Material and methods

We conducted a double-blind randomised clinical trial stratified by risk factors. We enrolled a cohort of 822 patients who underwent dental extractions, and were considered to be at risk of developing AO (previous surgical site infection, traumatic extraction, and tobacco smoking). After extraction, patients were randomly allocated for CHX group or placebo group, matched by risk factors. The primary outcome was clinical diagnosis of AO: increasing postoperative pain for 4 d within and around the socket, and total or partial breakdown of the blood clot in the socket with or without bone exposure.

Results

Follow-up was completed by 744 participants (372 chlorhexidine and 372 placebo). We detected no significant differences between the two groups at baseline. After completed follow-up, risk factors were equally distributed between the two groups. Overall incidence of OA was 4.97%, in which 27 participants treated with placebo (7.26%) and 10 participants treated with CHX (2.69%) developed AO. CHX reduced the incidence of AO by 63% [Absolute Risk Reduction: 4.57 (95% CI 1.5-7.7), Number Needed to Treat: 21.88 (95% CI 13.0-69.3), Fisher's exact test: p=0.006]. No adverse effects were reported.

Conclusion

The use of chlorhexidine 0.12% mouthwash after tooth extraction is safe and effective in reducing the incidence of AO in high-risk patients.

Dry Socket Etiology, Diagnosis, and Clinical Treatment Techniques

Dry socket, also termed fibrinolytic osteitis or alveolar osteitis, is a complication of tooth exodontia. A dry socket lesion is a post-extraction socket that exhibits exposed bone that is not covered by a blood clot or healing epithelium and exists inside or around the perimeter of the socket or alveolus for days after the extraction procedure. This article describes dry socket lesions; reviews the basic clinical techniques of treating different manifestations of dry socket lesions; and shows how microscope level loupe magnification of 6× to 8× or greater, combined with co-axial illumination or a dental operating microscope, facilitate more precise treatment of dry socket lesions. The author examines the scientific validity of the proposed causes of dry socket lesions (such as bacteria, inflammation, fibrinolysis, or traumatic extractions) and the scientific validity of different terminologies used to describe dry socket lesions. This article also presents an alternative model of what causes dry socket lesions, based on evidence from dental literature. Although the clinical techniques for treating dry socket lesions seem empirically correct, more evidence is required to determine the causes of dry socket lesions.

Chlorhexidine gel to prevent alveolar osteitis following mandibular third molar extractions

Data sourcesMedline/PubMed, Cochrane central, Scopus and Google scholar.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English between January 2010 and December 2015 were identified by two reviewers. Unpublished studies were not considered.Data extraction and synthesisStandard Cochrane Collaboration assessment tools were used to carry out a risk of bias assessment. The following data were collected from the articles; sample size, country, mean age of participants, diagnosis of alveolar osteitis (AO), type of intervention and outcomes. Heterogeneity (I²) was calculated to determine the statistical model to be used for meta-analysis.ResultsTen randomised control trials (RCTs) were included, with 862 participants. Eight studies used 0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX) gel in the experimental group, 1% CHX gel in one study, and in one study the concentration was not specified. Two studies used adjunctive antibiotics, and one study gave 400mg Ibuprofen to all participants.Six of the RCTs were at low risk of bias, three studies showed possible selection and/or performance bias, and one study gave no information on bias. Heterogeneity was low level (I² = 40%) and a funnel plot presented a low level of publication bias.The included RCTs used Blum's criteria for diagnosis of AO. Six of the RCTs were conducted double-blinded. The risk ratio (RR) was calculated for each RCT and also for the pooled effect. The overall pooled effect of CHX gel placed in the extraction socket following mandibular 3rd molar removal was calculated to have prevented 57% of AO instances (RR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.58; p<0.00001). Subgroup analysis of the effect of CHX gel in participants who smoked/used the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) was calculated to have prevented 40% of AO (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.87; p = 0.007). In the studies that used a split-mouth design, CHX gel prevented 71% of AO incidence (RR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.16, 0.50; p <0.0001).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis and systematic review concluded 'clinically significant evidence that CHX gel application in the extraction socket of mandibular 3rd molar has reduced the incidence of alveolar osteitis'.

Antimicrobial prescribing by dentists in Wales, UK: findings of the first cycle of a clinical audit

Objective To describe the findings of the first cycle of a clinical audit of antimicrobial use by general dental practitioners (GDPs).Setting General dental practices in Wales, UK.Subjects and methods Between April 2012 and March 2015, 279 GDPs completed the audit. Anonymous information about patients prescribed antimicrobials was recorded. Clinical information about the presentation and management of patients was compared to clinical guidelines published by the Scottish Dental Clinical Effectiveness Programme (SDCEP).Results During the data collection period, 5,782 antimicrobials were prescribed in clinical encounters with 5,460 patients. Of these 95.3% were antibiotic preparations, 2.7% were antifungal agents, and 0.6% were antivirals. Of all patients prescribed antibiotics, only 37.2% had signs of spreading infection or systemic involvement recorded, and 31.2% received no dental treatment. In total, 79.2% of antibiotic, 69.4% of antifungal, and 57.6% of antiviral preparations met audit standards for dose, frequency, and duration. GDPs identified that failure of previous local measures, patient unwillingness or inability to receive treatment, patient demand, time pressures, and patients' medical history may influence their prescribing behaviours.Conclusions The findings of the audit indicate a need for interventions to support GDPs so that they may make sustainable improvements to their antimicrobial prescribing practices.

Efficacy of different methods used for dry socket prevention and risk factor analysis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dry socket is one of the most common complications that develops after the extraction of a permanent tooth, and its prevention is more effective than its treatment.

OBJECTIVES

Analyze the efficacy of different methods used in preventing dry socket in order to decrease its incidence after tooth extraction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A Cochrane and PubMed-MEDLINE database search was conducted with the search terms "dry socket", "prevention", "risk factors", "alveolar osteitis" and "fibrynolitic alveolitis", both individually and using the Boolean operator "AND". The inclusion criteria were: clinical studies including at least 30 patients, articles published from 2005 to 2015 and written in English. The exclusion criteria were case reports and nonhuman studies.

RESULTS

30 publications were selected from a total of 250. Six of the 30 were excluded after reading the full text. The final review included 24 articles: 9 prospective studies, 2 retrospective studies and 13 clinical trials. They were stratified according to their level of scientific evidence using SIGN criteria (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network).

CONCLUSIONS

All treatments included in the review were aimed at decreasing the incidence of dry socket. Locally administering chlorhexidine or applying platelet-rich plasma reduces the likelihood of developing this complication. Antibiotic prescription does not avoid postoperative complications after lower third molar surgery. With regard to risk factors, all of the articles selected suggest that patient age, history of previous infection and the difficulty of the extraction are the most common predisposing factors for developing dry socket. There is no consensus that smoking, gender or menstrual cycles are risk factors. Taking the scientific quality of the articles evaluated into account, a level B recommendation has been given for the proposed-procedures in the prevention of dry socket.

Platelet rich fibrin in the management of established dry socket

OBJECTIVES

Dry socket may occur secondary to the removal of any tooth. However, most dry socket cases develop in the third molar region. Dry socket is multifactorial in nature and has been treated using various modalities with varying success rates. This study assessed the efficacy of platelet rich fibrin (PRF) in established dry socket.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten patients of either sex aged from 41 to 64 years with established dry socket according to established criteria were treated using PRF. Evaluation was performed by observing the reduction of pain using visual analogue scale, analgesic tablet use over the follow-up period, and healing parameters.

RESULTS

Pain was reduced on the first day in all patients with decreased analgesic use. Pain was drastically reduced during follow-up on the first, second, third, and seventh days with a fall in pain score of 0 to 1 after the first day alone. The pain scores of all patients decreased to 1 by the first day except in one patient, and the scores decreased to 0 in all patients after 48 hours. Total analgesic intake ranged from 2 to 6 tablets (aceclofenac 100 mg per tablet) over the follow-up period of 7 days. Healing was satisfactory in all patients by the end of the seventh day.

CONCLUSION

PRF showed early pain reduction in established dry socket with minimal analgesic intake. No patients had allergic reactions to PRF as it is derived from the patient's own blood. PRF showed good wound healing. Our study suggests that PRF should be considered as a treatment modality for established dry socket.

The efficacy of chlorhexidine gel in the prevention of alveolar osteitis after mandibular third molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis is a very painful and distressing condition for a patient who has recently undergone a tooth extraction and has led dental professionals to search for preventive measures. The aim of this meta-analysis to determine the effect of chlorhexidine (CHX) gel on the incidence of alveolar osteitis after mandibular third molar extraction.

METHODS

Studies were searched for on electronic search engines using Medline (PubMed), Cochrane central, Scopus and advanced Google Scholar from May 2015 to December 2015. Randomized controlled trial studies with a history of mandibular third molar extraction, along with the administration of topical chlorhexidine gel were included. The risk of bias of the selected articles was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. RevMan 5.3 Software was used to analyze the pooled effect. I2 was calculated to determine heterogeneity and a funnel plot was used to check the risk of bias. Subgroup analysis was also done based on the presence of confounding factors (smoking, oral contraceptive etc.) and on split mouth design.

RESULTS

Out of 52 articles, ten met the inclusion criteria. 862 participants were involved in the selected studies with a mean age range from 24.15 ± 5.02 to 36.65 ± 11. The overall RR was 0.43 (95% CI: 0.32, 0.58, p < 0.00001). Three studies used a split-mouth design to check the effect of chlorhexidine gel in the prevention of alveolar osteitis incidence. There was a pooled effect of 0.29 (95% CI: 0.16, 0.50) for the intervention group in the split mouth design studies. A stratified analysis was done to check the effect of CHX gel in patients with confounding factors and a significant reduction of AO incidence was found; 0.60 (95% CI: 0.41, 0.87; p = 0.05) in the intervention. There was no reported adverse reaction. The heterogeneity (I2) was 40%. The funnel plot showed that there was no significant publication bias.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that CHX gel is superior to a placebo in reducing the incidence of alveolar osteitis after mandibular third molar extraction.

Potential hazards due to food additives in oral hygiene products

Food additives used to preserve flavor or to enhance the taste and appearance of foods are also available in oral hygiene products. The aim of this review is to provide information concerning food additives in oral hygiene products and their adverse effects. A great many of food additives in oral hygiene products are potential allergens and they may lead to allergic reactions such as urticaria, contact dermatitis, rhinitis, and angioedema. Dental practitioners, as well as health care providers, must be aware of the possibility of allergic reactions due to food additives in oral hygiene products. Proper dosage levels, delivery vehicles, frequency, potential benefits, and adverse effects of oral health products should be explained completely to the patients. There is a necessity to raise the awareness among dental professionals on this subject and to develop a data gathering system for possible adverse reactions.

Postoperative socket irrigation with drinking tap water reduces the risk of inflammatory complications following surgical removal of third molars: a multicenter randomized trial

Objectives

The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of postoperative irrigation of the socket with drinking tap water on inflammatory complications following lower third molar removal.

Material and methods

A multicenter randomized controlled trial was carried out from June 2013 to June 2014. In one arm of the study, patients were instructed to irrigate the tooth socket and surgical site with a Monoject® Curved 412 Tip Syringe (Tyco/healthcare-Kendall, Mansfield, MA, USA) with tap water. In a second arm of the study, the standard postoperative instructions did not include irrigation instructions. The incidences of alveolar osteitis and wound infection were recorded for each group and analyzed by the Fisher’s exact test.

Results

A total of 280 patients with 333 mandibular third molars were analyzed. According to the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, inflammatory complications occurred in 18 cases in the Monoject® group (11.4 %) compared to 34 cases (19.1 %) in the control group (p = 0.04). These complications were associated with significant worse outcomes regarding quality of life, pain, and trismus and caused significantly more missed days of work or study. Female gender, age >26, bone removal, deep impacted third molars, less experienced surgeons, and a high amount of debris at the surgical site were also identified as risk factors for developing inflammatory complications following lower third molar removal.

Conclusion

Irrigation of the surgical site with drinking tap water using a curved syringe following removal of third molars is effective in reducing the risk of inflammatory complications.

Clinical relevance

Water is a very accessible, cost-effective irrigant without side effects and the results from this study have proven that it can be used to reduce the risk of inflammatory complications and associated morbidity following lower third molar removal.

Survey of Spanish dentists on the prescription of antibiotics and antiseptics in surgery for impacted lower third molars

Background

This study explored the attitude of registered dentists in Biscay towards prescribing antibiotics and/or antiseptics to prevent potential infections after surgical extraction of completely bone-impacted third molars in otherwise healthy individuals, with no history of infection.

Material and Methods

We sent letters to 931 registered dentists in Biscay, with an explanation of the study objectives, description of a case of lower third molar impaction, including a panoramic radiograph, and a questionnaire. The questionnaire asked whether they would prescribe antibiotics and/or antiseptics, in the hypothetical case of lower third molar extraction surgery presented, and if so, when, what type, at what dose and how long for.

Results

The questionnaire was completed by 261 dentists (28%), with a mean age of 44.3 years old (SD 11.05) and mean of 18.7 years working as a dentist (SD 9). A total of 216 dentists (82.7%) considered it necessary to prescribe antibiotics. Of these, 126 (58.3%) would prescribe amoxicillin and 74 (34.5%) amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, while 129 dentists (59%) would prescribe antibiotics both before and after surgery and 10 (4.6%) only after surgery. The most common doses were amoxicillin 500 mg or 750 mg every 8 hours, and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 875/125 mg every 8 hours, in both cases for a mean of 7 days. Further, 74 dentists (28%) said they would use immediate post-extraction socket irrigation with chlorhexidine, while 211 (81%) would prescribe antiseptics in the postoperative period, of whom 97% recommended chlorhexidine. We did not find significant differences in the use of antibiotics or antiseptics by dentist age (ANOVA p=0.22 and p=0.53, respectively), or professional experience (ANOVA p=0.45 and p=0.62).

Conclusions

In our sample, the prophylactic prescription of antibiotics and/or chlorhexidine is widespread in clinical practice, in most cases amoxicillin and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid for a week, starting the treatment before surgery.

Key words:Extraction, lower third molar, survey, antibiotics, antiseptics.

Efficacy of different methods used for dry socket management: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dry socket is one of the most common complications occurring after the extraction of a permanent tooth, but in spite of its high incidence there is not an established treatment for this condition.

OBJECTIVES

Analyze the efficacy of different methods used in the management of dry socket regarding results of pain's relief and alveolar mucosa healing compared to conventional surgical treatment of curettage and saline irrigation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A Cochrane and PubMed-MEDLINE database search was conducted with the search terms "dry socket", "post-extraction complications", "alvogyl", "alveolar osteitis" and "fibrynolitic alveolitis", individually and next, using the Boolean operator "AND". The inclusion criteria were: clinical studies including at least 10 patients, articles published from 2004 to 2014 written in English. The exclusion criteria were case reports and nonhuman studies.

RESULTS

11 publications were selected from a total of 627. Three of the 11 were excluded after reading the full text. The final review included 8 articles: 3 prospective studies, 2 retrospective studies and 3 clinical trials. They were stratified according to their level of scientific evidence using the SORT criteria (Strenght of Recommendation Taxonomy).

CONCLUSIONS

All treatments included in the review have the aim to relief patient's pain and promote alveolar mucosa healing in dry socket. Given the heterogeneity of interventions and the type of measurement scale, the results are difficult to compare. Curettage and irrigation should be carried out in dry socket, as well as another therapy such as LLLT, zinc oxide eugenol or plasma rich in growth factors, which are the ones that show better results in pain remission and alveolar mucosa healing. Assessment alveolar bone esposure must be a factor to consider in future research. Taking into account the scientific quality of the articles evaluated, a level B recommendation is given for therapeutic interventions proposed for the treatment of dry socket.

Salt water mouthwash post extraction reduced post operative complications

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial.

INTERVENTION

Patients aged ≥16 years requiring non-surgical extraction were randomised into three groups. Group A (n = 40) were instructed to gargle six times daily with warm saline and group B (n = 40) twice daily; group C (n = 40) were not instructed to gargle with warm saline and served as controls. All patients received the same oral antibiotics and analgesics, and similar postoperative instructions, except regarding saline rinses. Mouth rinsing was to start 24 hours after the procedure and patients were reviewed at 72 hours.

OUTCOME MEASURE

The patients were evaluated 72 h post-operatively for the presence of alveolar osteitis, acute inflamed socket and acute infected socket by an independent observer who was blinded to the treatment group.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty patients were randomised (40 per group). The overall prevalence of alveolar osteitis was 10.0% and that of acute inflamed socket was 25.0%. No cases of acute infected socket were observed.There was a statistically significant difference between the study groups with respect to the development of alveolar osteitis (x(2) = 15.43, df = 2, P = 0.001), but not for acute inflamed socket, with only 2.5% of the saline groups (2 out of 80) developing alveolar osteitis compared with 25% (10 of 40) in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The instruction to use warm saline mouth rinse is beneficial in the prevention of alveolar osteitis after dental extractions. There is no significant difference in the efficacy of the twice-daily warm saline mouth rinse regimen compared to the six times daily regimen. The twice-daily saline mouth rinse regimen is more convenient, and patient compliance may be better than with the six times daily rinse routine.

A practical approach to evidence-based dentistry: VI: How to use a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW

Dental practitioners face new clinical challenges on a daily basis. New treatment options and diagnostic tools are disseminated quickly, and the volume of articles and new evidence is overwhelming. Systematic reviews summarize and synthesize the available evidence related to diagnosis, therapy, prognosis, and harm for clinicians, patients, and decision makers. Such reviews represent one of the most powerful tools to translate knowledge into action.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The critical appraisal of this type of study involves assessing the risk of bias, results, and applicability of such study. The authors provide guidance for clinicians to critically appraise systematic reviews and apply the findings in clinical practice.

Systemic review of dry socket: aetiology, treatment, and prevention

Our systemic review is to make a comprehensive review about the aetiology, treatment and the prevention of dry socket, the inclusion criteria were all the studies that discuss the dry socket and its etiology, treatment and prevention and exclusion criteria were all the studies that discuss the other complications of tooth extraction, the materials and methods used for this systemic review was to search in the Pub Medline database between 2008 to 2013, using specific words "dry socket, aetiology, treatment and prevention" and published in the English language, the articles were screened by abstract for relevance to aetiology, treatment and prevention of dry socket, 82 papers were identified in pub med but a total of 36 out of Publications were included in the final systemic review according to the specific keywords and materials mentioned above. The occurrence of dry socket in an everyday oral surgery or dental practice is unavoidable. The risk factors are smoking, surgical trauma, single extractions, age, sex, medical history, systemic disorder, extraction site, amount of anaesthesia, operator experience, antibiotics use prior to surgery, difficulty of the surgery and the previous surgical site infection in addition to oral Contraceptives, menstrual cycle and immediate postextraction socket irrigation with normal saline. The traditional options of treatment are directed toward palliative care, such as the irrigation of the surgical site, avoiding curetting the extraction socket, Packing with a zinc oxide- eugenol paste on iodoform gauze can be considered to relieve acute pain episodes, there is also new agents in the market can accelerate the healing of the socket such as PRGF and GECB. The prevention methods include avoiding smoking before and after surgery and a traumatic surgery, the use of antibiotics, such as, azithromycin, can be considered, the other preventive measures such as chlorhecidine rinse or gel can be effective in the reduction of dry socket incidence.

Pre- and postoperative management techniques. Before and after. Part 1: medical morbidities

This article provides readers with an overview of available evidence in relation to providing care to patients in different medical circumstances within oral surgery. There is evidence available to support discussions with patients taking particular medications (such as bisphosphonates, anticoagulants and corticosteroids) and also to try to prevent certain complications (such as 'dry socket'). In order to reduce the risks of potential morbidities, either perioperatively or postoperatively, operators must use high-quality, reliable and informed protocols, management techniques, advice and interventions to provide patients with the best care. These are used both preoperatively and postoperatively and patients should be consented appropriately, in a manner tailored to their own individual circumstances, but also using available evidence to explain the benefits and harms of any given procedure. In this short series we will outline and discuss common pre- and postoperative management techniques, protocols and instructions, and the evidence available to support these.

Effect of intra-alveolar placement of 0.2% chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel on the incidence of alveolar osteitis following the extraction of mandibular third molars. A double-blind randomized clinical trial

Alveolar osteitis (AO) is a common complication after third molar surgery. One of the most studied agents in its prevention is chlorhexidine (CHX), which has proved to be effective. Objectives: The aim of this randomized double-blind clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy of 0.2% bioadhesive chlorhexidine gel placed intra-alveolar in the prevention of AO after the extraction of mandibular third molars and to analyze the impact of risk factors such as smoking and oral contraceptives in the development of AO. Study Design: The study was a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial performed in the Ambulatory Surgery Unit of Hospital Vall d’Hebron and was approved by the Ethics Committee. A total of 160 patients randomly received 0.2% bioadhesive gel (80 patients) or bioadhesive placebo (80 patients). Results: 0.2% bioadhesive chlorhexidine gel applied in the alveolus after third molar extraction reduced the incidence of dry socket by 22% compared to placebo with differences that were not statistically significant. Smoking and the use of oral contraceptives were not related to higher incidence of dry socket. Female patients and the difficulty of the surgery were associated with a higher incidence of AO with statistically significant differences. 0.2% bioadhesive chlorhexidine gel did not produce any of the side effects related to chlorhexidine rinses. Conclusions: A 22% reduction of the incidence of alveolar osteitis with the application of 0.2% bioadhesive chlorhexidine gel compared to placebo with differences that were not statistically significant was found in this clinical trial. The lack of adverse reactions and complications related to chlorhexidine gel supports its clinical use specially in simple extractions and adds some advantages compared to the rinses in terms of duration of the treatment and reduction of staining and taste disturbance.

Key words:Alveolar osteitis, dry socket, chlorhexidine bioadhesive gel, mandibular third molar surgery.

A randomized clinical trial compared the effect of intra-alveolar 0.2 % Chlorohexidine bio-adhesive gel versus 0.12% Chlorohexidine rinse in reducing alveolar osteitis following molar teeth extractions

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate socket healing, incidence of acute alveolar ostieitis (AO) and associated pain following single molar tooth extraction in patients who receive intra-alveolar 0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX) gel, and those who rinsed with 0.12 % CHX rinse.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted on two parallel groups of patients. Group 1 (141 patients): Rinsed with 0.12 % CHX rinse from the second postoperative day, two times daily for a week. Group2 (160 patients): Who had direct intra-alveolar application of 0.2% CHX gel and day 3 post-operatively. The socket was evaluated 3 and 7 day postoperatively for the presence of AO by checking probing tenderness in the socket, empty socket, food debris, halitosis and pain assessment by VAS.

RESULTS

Forty-eight AO cases were diagnosed out of 301 extractions (15.9%). In Group 1, 25 cases were found (17.7%) while 23 cases were found in Group 2 (14.4%). The difference was not statistically significant (p=0.428). Presence of empty socket and food debris in Group 1 were higher than in Group 2 but the difference was not statistically significant (p= 0.390 & p = 0.415). Occurrence of halitosis in Group 2 was more than Group 1, but the difference was not significant (p= 0.440). Statistical significance was found between AO in extraction done by root separation (29%) and those routinely extracted (12.3 %) (p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative evaluation of molar extraction sockets that received direct intra-alveolar application of 0.2% CHX gel showed insignificant less occurrence of AO when compared with 0.12 % CHX rinse.