Versatility of platelet rich fibrin in the management of alveolar osteitis-A clinical and prospective study

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.

Effectiveness of the platelet-rich fibrin in the control of pain associated with alveolar osteitis: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this scoping review was to determine the effectiveness of the platelet-rich fibrin in the control of pain associated with alveolar osteitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Reporting was based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews. A literature search was conducted in the PubMed and Scopus databases to identify all clinical studies on the application of platelet-rich fibrin in the control of pain caused by alveolar osteitis. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers and qualitatively described.

RESULTS

The initial search returned 81 articles, with 49 identified after duplicates removal; of these, 8 were selected according to the inclusion criteria. Three of the eight studies were randomized controlled clinical trials, and four were non-randomized clinical studies, two of which were controlled. One study was case series. In all of these studies, pain control was evaluated using the visual analog scale. Overall, the use of platelet-rich fibrin resulted effective in the control of pain determined by alveolar osteitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of this scoping review, the application of platelet-rich fibrin in the post-extra-extraction alveolus reduced the pain associated with alveolar osteitis in almost all the included studies. Nevertheless, high-quality randomized trials with adequate sample size are warranted to draw firm conclusions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Pain associated with alveolar osteitis causes discomfort to the patient and is challenging to be treated. Use of platelet-rich fibrin could be a promising clinical strategy for pain control in alveolar osteitis if its effectiveness will be confirmed by further high-quality studies.

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.

Pain Relief and Antimicrobial Activity in Alveolar Osteitis after Platelet-Rich Fibrin Application—A Non-Randomized Controlled Study

The objective was to compare pain relief in alveolar osteitis achieved by the application of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and aspirin cones, and to assess the influence of both treatments on bacterial concentrations in post-extraction wounds. A split-mouth, single-center, non-randomized controlled trial was conducted in 30 patients. Pain relief was assessed using the visual analog scale at three time points (before, 24 h after, and 48 h after intervention). Bacterial concentrations were evaluated from cultures of swab samples collected at the three time points. A Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test was performed to detect differences in distributions of scalar variables between treatment with PRF and aspirin cones. Pain relief at 24 h and 48 h after treatment was significantly higher (p = 0.003) with PRF application than with aspirin cone placement. Additionally, PRF application caused a significantly higher reduction in aerobic bacteria concentration, an average increase, instead of a decrease, in lactic acid bacilli concentration in the first 24 h, and a significantly greater increase in streptococci concentration at 48 h follow-up. PRF provides better pain relief than aspirin cones in alveolar osteitis. Bacterial concentrations in the extraction wounds are consistent with the pain relief achieved after PRF or aspirin application.

Clinical management of alveolar osteitis. A systematic review

Background

Alveolar Osteitis (AO) is one of the most common complications of tooth extraction. Several therapeutic interventions have been described for the treatment of AO, however, there are no treatment standardized protocols. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review on the efficacy in pain control of the different treatments for AO. The feasibility of the application of these interventions is also discussed.

Material and Methods

A structured electronic and hand search strategy was applied to PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, OpenGrey, and Google Scholar between January 2010 and July 2020 to identify studies according to PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria were original English and Spanish clinical trials that analyzed pain-control parameters according to visual analog scale (VAS, 0-10 scale), or pain relief patients’ percentages. Those treatments that reach VAS ≤ 4 on day 2 or before; or ≥ 85% of patients with absence of pain symptoms at day 7 or before were considered accepTable for their recommendation.

Results

The final review included 17 clinical trials. Among them, there were analyzed a total of 39 different AO treatments. 53,8% of the treatments fulfill the proposed parameters for pain control.

Conclusions

Treatment alternatives are multiple, heterogeneous, and difficult to compare. The management of AO is summarized in basic (intra-alveolar irrigation) and specific procedures (Alveogyl®, Neocones®, SaliCept Patch®, Low-Level Laser, Platelet-Rich Fibrin) that reach pain control success. They could be selected according to their availability and advantages or disadvantages.

Key words:Dry socket, alveolar osteitis, treatment, management, pain control, pain relief.