Evaluation of topical viscous 2% lidocaine jelly as an adjunct during the management of alveolar osteitis

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four bibliographic databases up to 28 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies.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

Alternatives to opioids for acute pain management after dental procedures: A Department of Veterans Affairs consensus paper

BACKGROUND

Opioid misuse is a widespread public health problem, and opioids are often prescribed in the dental environment. These recommendations provide alternatives to opioids to reduce or eliminate dental procedure-related acute pain.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary working group developed these clinical recommendations to specifically address procedure-related acute pain. These recommendations, which are based on published peer-reviewed research and guidelines, include therapies used before, during, and after dental procedures. When evidence is not definitive, the best practices, which are based on experts' consensus, are included. The recommendations are not intended to be exhaustive.

RESULTS

These recommendations are a summary of the evidence and best practices for opioid alternatives to treat acute pain related to dental procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Dental providers should prioritize opioid stewardship when managing procedure-related pain with strategies such as thorough preprocedure pain assessment, minimally invasive techniques, preemptive analgesia, intraprocedure pain management, and appropriately selected postprocedure pharmacologic therapy.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

These recommendations are a concise resource for clinical providers. It is important to address patients' procedure-related pain, using nonopioids whenever possible. Alternatives are outlined, allowing providers to make informed decisions.

Alveolar Osteitis: A Review of Current Concepts

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present review was to explore the pathogenesis and etiology of alveolar osteitis (AO) to obtain a more intuitive understanding of the clinical prevention and management of the condition. The different treatment modalities were discussed through both the mechanistic understanding of AO and the evidence regarding the different modes of prevention and management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Ovid Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane Central Register online databases were used to complete an advanced search using the MeSH term "dry socket," generating 756 results.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies on the prevention of AO were included, with 66 studies included for review of the reported data overall. The information was categorized into incidence, etiology and pathogenesis, prevention, and management. The relevant background information and evidence for each category were summarized.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding of the pathogenesis and etiology of AO has improved in recent years, which has been helpful for developing effective evidence-based treatment and prevention of the condition. Clinicians should be aware of the complexity and multifactorial nature of the etiology of AO and the current concepts regarding the prevention and treatment of AO.

The pharmacological management of dental pain

Introduction: Dental pain is primarily treated by dentists and emergency medicine clinicians and may occur because of insult to the tooth or oral surgery. The dental impaction pain model (DIPM) has been widely used in clinical studies of analgesic agents and is generalizable to many other forms of pain.Areas Covered: The authors discuss the DIPM, which has allowed for important head-to-head studies of analgesic agents, such as acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and combinations. Postsurgical dental pain follows a predictable trajectory over the course of one to 3 days. Dental pain may have odontic origin or may be referred pain from other areas of the body.Expert opinion: Pain following oral surgery has sometimes been treated with longer-than-necessary courses of opioid therapy. Postsurgical dental pain may be moderate to severe but typically resolves in a day or two after the extraction. Opioid monotherapy, rarely used in dentistry but combination therapy (opioid plus acetaminophen or an NSAID), was sometimes used as well as nonopioid analgesic monotherapy. The dental impaction pain model has been valuable in the study of analgesics but does not address all painful conditions, for example, pain with a neuropathic component.

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.

Dry socket: incidence, clinical features, and predisposing factors

Background. Dry socket is a global phenomenon. The purpose of the study was to investigate the incidence of dry socket in recent times in a Nigerian Tertiary Hospital. Methods. Patients who were referred for dental extractions were included in the study. The case files of patients were obtained and information retrieved included biodata, indication for extraction, number and type of teeth extracted, oral hygiene status, compliance to oral hygiene instructions, and development of dry socket. Results. One thousand, one hundred and eighty two patients with total of 1362 teeth extracted during the 4-year period of the study were analyzed, out of which 1.4% teeth developed dry socket. The mean age (SD) was 35.2 (16.0) years. Most of the patients who presented with dry socket were in the fourth decade of life. Mandibular teeth were affected more than maxillary teeth. Molars were more affected. Retained roots and third molars were conspicuous in the cases with dry socket. Conclusion. The incidence of dry socket in our centre was lower than previous reports. Oral hygiene status, lower teeth, and female gender were significantly associated with development of dry socket. Treatment with normal saline irrigation and ZnO eugenol dressings allowed relief of the symptoms.

Sex and gender aspects in anesthetics and pain medication

The influence of sex and gender on anesthesia and analgesic therapy remains poorly understood, nevertheless the numerous physiological and pharmacological differences present between men and women. Although in anesthesiology sex-gender aspects have attracted little attention, it has been reported that women have a greater sensitivity to the non-depolarizing neuroblocking agents, whereas males are more sensitive than females to propofol. It has been suggested that men wake slower than women after general anesthesia and have less postoperative nausea and vomiting. Sexual hormones seem to be of importance in the onset of differences. Nevertheless, in the last years, sex-gender influences on pain and analgesia have become a hot topic and data regarding sex-gender differences in response to pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic pain treatments are still scanty, inconsistent, and non-univocal. In particular, females seem to be more sensitive than males to opioid receptor agonists. Women may experience respiratory depression and other adverse effects more easily if they are given the same doses as males. Evidently, there is an obvious need for more research, which should include psychological and social factors in experimental preclinical and clinical paradigms in view of their importance on pain mechanism, in order to individualize analgesia to optimize pain relief.

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

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a complication of dental extractions and occurs more commonly in extractions involving mandibular molar teeth. It is associated with severe pain developing 2 to 3 days postoperatively, a socket that may be partially or totally devoid of blood clot and in some patients there may be a complaint of halitosis. It can result in an increase in postoperative visits.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of local interventions for the prevention and treatment of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) following tooth extraction.

SEARCH METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 29 October 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 10), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 29 October 2012) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 29 October 2012). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. We also searched the reference lists of articles and contacted experts and organisations to identify any further 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 post-extraction. 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 for the management of dry socket because these interventions are evaluated in separate Cochrane reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently undertook risk of bias assessment and data extraction in duplicate for included studies using pre-designed proformas. Any reports of adverse events were recorded and summarised into a table when these were available. We contacted trial authors for further details where these were unclear. We followed The Cochrane Collaboration 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 instead. We used the GRADE tool to assess the quality of the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one trials with 2570 participants met the inclusion criteria; 18 trials with 2376 participants for the prevention of dry socket and three studies with 194 participants for the treatment of dry socket. The risk of bias assessment identified six studies at high risk of bias, 14 studies at unclear risk of bias and one studies at low risk of bias. When compared to placebo, rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinses (0.12% and 0.2% concentrations) both before and after extraction(s) prevented approximately 42% of dry socket(s) with a RR of 0.58 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.78; P < 0.001) (four trials, 750 participants, moderate quality of evidence). The prevalence of dry socket varied 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 with (0.12% and 0.2%) chlorhexidine rinse to prevent one patient having dry socket (NNT) was 232 (95% CI 176 to 417), 47 (95% CI 35 to 84) and 8 (95% CI 6 to 14) for control prevalences of dry socket of 1%, 5% and 30% respectively.Compared to placebo, placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) after extractions prevented approximately 58% of dry socket(s) with a RR of 0.42 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.87; P = 0.02) (two trials, in 133 participants, moderate quality of evidence). The number of patients needed to be treated with chlorhexidine gel to prevent one patient having dry socket (NNT) was 173 (95% CI 127 to 770), 35 (95% CI 25 to 154) and 6 (95% CI 5 to 26) for control prevalences of dry socket of 1%, 5% and 30% respectively.A further 10 intrasocket interventions to prevent dry socket were each evaluated in single studies, and therefore there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects. Five interventions for the treatment of dry socket were evaluated in a total of three studies providing insufficient evidence to determine their effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most tooth extractions are undertaken by dentists for a variety of reasons, however, all but three studies included in the present review included participants undergoing extraction of third molars, most of which were undertaken by oral surgeons. There is some evidence that rinsing with chlorhexidine (0.12% and 0.2%) or placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) in the sockets of extracted teeth, provides a benefit in preventing dry socket. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the other 10 preventative interventions each evaluated in single studies. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of any of the interventions to treat dry socket. The present review found some evidence for the association of minor adverse reactions with use of 0.12%, 0.2% and 2% chlorhexidine mouthrinses, though most studies were not designed 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 (though previous allergy to chlorhexidine was an exclusion criterion in these trials). In view of recent reports in the UK of two cases of serious adverse events associated with irrigation of dry socket with chlorhexidine mouthrinse, it is recommended that all members of the dental team prescribing chlorhexidine products are aware of the potential for both minor and serious adverse side effects.

Clinical concepts of dry socket

Dry socket is one of the most studied complications in dentistry, and a great number of studies have searched for an effective and safe method for its prevention and treatment. One of the great clinical challenges since the first case was reported has been the inconsistency and differences in the various definitions of dry socket and the criteria used for diagnosis. The pathophysiology, etiology, prevention, and treatment of dry socket are very important in the practice of oral surgery. The aim of the present report was to review and discuss each aspect.

The efficacy of a topical anesthetic gel in the relief of pain associated with localized alveolar osteitis

PURPOSE

This prospective randomized clinical study assessed the efficacy of pain control for postextraction alveolar osteitis comparing the use of eugenol on a gauze strip versus a thermosetting gel containing 2.5% prilocaine and 2.5% lidocaine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-five patients who presented with postextraction alveolar osteitis were randomly assigned to either a control group or test group. After irrigation of the extraction site with normal saline solution, the control patients were treated with eugenol on a gauze strip placed in the socket and the test patients were treated with the thermosetting gel placed directly into the socket. All patients were given a series of visual analog scales to record their pretreatment pain and post-treatment pain at 5, 10, and 15 minutes and then at 1-hour increments during waking hours for the next 48 hours. They were also given a prescription for an analgesic to use for breakthrough pain during the 48-hour period, if necessary, and instructed to record the dose and timing of any pain medication taken. All patients were seen for follow-up at 48 hours after treatment.

RESULTS

The mean pretreatment pain score was 6.72 on a scale ranging from 1 to 10 for the eugenol group and 6.37 for the prilocaine-lidocaine group (SE, 0.46), and the 2 groups were not different (P = .62). In the immediate post-treatment period (0-15 minutes) the pain levels were significantly reduced in both groups (Ps < .001). However, the thermosetting gel produced a significantly greater reduction in pain (mean, 3.23; SE, 0.62) than the eugenol (mean, 4.83; SE, 0.43) (P = .022). Over the next 48 hours, the pain level was nominally less with the thermosetting gel, but this difference was not statistically significant (Ps = .2).

CONCLUSION

Although the efficacy of the 2 treatments was not significantly different, the nominal superiority and ease of using the thermosetting gel warrant further investigation.

Quantifying the healing of dry socket using a clinical volumetric method

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the healing of dry sockets using a simple clinical volumetric method that measures the reduction in the volume of dry sockets and to study the effects of sex and smoking on socket healing.

STUDY DESIGN

Volumes of 28 mandibular dry sockets were measured under standard conditions by injecting sterile normal saline solution into them and aspirating the solution back into a calibrated syringe. Measurements were done at diagnosis (T0), at 4 days after diagnosis (T4), at 7 days after diagnosis (T7), and at 14 days after diagnosis (T14). Differences in socket volumes at different intervals were analyzed using paired samples t test and differences between males and females or between smokers and nonsmokers were analyzed using independent samples t test.

RESULTS

Average socket volume in all patients decreased by an average of 5.16% daily from 1.44 (+/- 0.36) mL at T0 to 1.08 (+/- 0.43) mL at T4, 0.74 (+/- 0.35) mL at T7, and 0.40 (+/- 0.28) mL at T14. These differences were statistically significant (P = 0.00). No statistically significant difference in the rate of socket healing was found between males and females or between smokers and nonsmokers.

CONCLUSION

Dry socket healing can be quantified using the volumetric method described in this study. Sex and smoking do not appear to affect the rate of dry socket healing.

The relationship of “shisha” (water pipe) smoking to postextraction dry socket

PURPOSE

This study was undertaken to determine whether "shisha" (water pipe) smokers (SS) were at a different risk of developing dry socket (DS) than were cigarette smokers (CS) or nonsmokers (NS) and to assess the effect of preoperative and postoperative smoking habits on the incidence of DS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred NS, 100 CS, and 100 SS were enrolled. Surgery for removal of mandibular third molars was performed under local anesthesia with no incision or bone removal. At 1, 4, and 7 days after surgery, postoperative evaluation and postoperative smoking were recorded by the same examiner. The chi(2) test was used for statistical analysis of results. Statistical significance was defined as a value of P <.05.

RESULTS

Smokers had 2 to 3 times the risk of NS for developing DS. Although SS had a greater incidence of DS than did CS, the difference was not significant (P =.083). The incidence of DS was not age dependent. Smokers who smoked the day of surgery had a significantly higher incidence of DS than did smokers who smoked the second day after surgery. Compared with NS, CS who smoked the day of surgery and SS who smoked the day of surgery or the first day after surgery had a significantly increased incidence of DS (CS/NS, day 0, P =.001; SS/NS, day 0, P =.001; day 1, P =.005).

CONCLUSION

SS had 3 times the risk of NS for developing DS, but there was no statistically significant difference between SS and CS. Increased frequency of smoking and smoking during the day of surgery significantly increased the incidence of DS.

A clinical evaluation of dry socket in a Nigerian teaching hospital

PURPOSE

We sought to determine the incidence of dry socket in a Nigerian teaching hospital and to evaluate the patients' demographic pattern, predisposing factors, the treatment given, and treatment outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of records of dental extractions complicated by dry socket in Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospital, Ile-Ife, between January 1996 and December 2000 was undertaken. Information retrieved included patient sociodemographic data, indications for extraction, tooth extracted, status of attending surgeon, onset of symptoms, relevant findings of the examining clinician, interval before presentation, treatment given, and its outcome.

RESULTS

Of the 3,319 dental extractions performed in 3,008 patients, 136 (4.1%) were complicated by dry socket. The patients' mean age was 33.4 (15.4) years and a peak age incidence of 21 to 30 years was found. A slight female preponderance (1.4:1) was observed. The majority of patients were in the low-income group, and presentation in the hospital was prompt in the high-income group. Mandibular teeth were affected 3 times more than maxillary teeth (P =.00080). Most cases of dry socket resulted from extractions performed by undergraduates and house officers. Various underlying systemic conditions were found in 11.0% of cases, none of which included use of oral contraceptives. Treatment was usually the use of zinc oxide eugenol dressing in an irrigated socket, combined with antibiotic therapy in 45.3% of cases. No adverse reaction to zinc oxide eugenol was observed.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of dry socket in our hospital is 4.1%. The mandible was involved 3 times more than the maxilla. With the use of zinc oxide eugenol dressing, 70.6% of patients completed treatment satisfactorily and 29.2% were lost to follow-up.

Effects of 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate and amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid on the prevention of alveolar osteitis following mandibular third molar extractions

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate and amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid combination as a prophylactic therapy for the prevention of alveolar osteitis after mandibular third molar extractions and to investigate adverse reactions to chlorhexidine.

STUDY DESIGN

This randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel group study was conducted in a group of 177 subjects, from which 3 groups were formed. The first group (n = 62) received 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate, the second group (n = 56) received a 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate and amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid combination, and the third group (n = 59) received 0.09% sterile saline solution. All patients were recalled for the diagnosis of alveolar osteitis on the third and seventh postoperative days.

RESULTS

When patients in the antibiotic group were compared with those in the other 2 groups, a significant reduction in alveolar osteitis was noted (P <.05). An alteration in taste, the bad taste of the solution, and staining of dentures and oral tissues were the major complaints about chlorhexidine.

CONCLUSION

It would be more beneficial to use chlorhexidine solution with a beta-lactamase inhibitor-containing antibiotic to enhance its effectiveness for the prevention of alveolar osteitis.

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) in a dog: a case report

Following extraction of a maxillary left first molar tooth in an eight year-old retriever, the dog re-presented five days later because of oral pain, which did not respond to analgesic therapy. The extraction site contained a foul-smelling fluid, but did not contain a clot or granulation tissue. Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) was diagnosed. The alveolus was curetted and flushed, and the dog was given cefalexine and prednisolone. The alveolus was filling with healthy granulation tissue one week later and the dog was no longer in pain.