Role of Placement of Wet Gauze Versus Dry Gauze After Extraction of Molars in Prevention of Dry Socket

Zoina; Jahangir Hammad; Maqbool Alam; Sidra Khan; Rahim Jan; Abdal Wahed

doi:10.70749/ijbr.v3i4.1003

Authors

Zoina Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Bolan Medical Complex Hospital, Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan.
Jahangir Hammad Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Bolan Medical Complex Hospital, Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan.
Maqbool Alam Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Bolan Medical Complex Hospital, Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan.
Sidra Khan Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Bolan Medical Complex Hospital, Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan.
Rahim Jan Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Bolan Medical Complex Hospital, Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan.
Abdal Wahed Bolan Medical Complex Hospital (BMCH), Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i4.1003

Keywords:

Dry Socket, Alveolar Osteitis, Molar Extraction, Wet Gauze, Dry Gauze, Post-extraction Care

Abstract

Background: One of the most frequent outpatient treatments is dental extraction, and there are serious risks of post-extraction problems such bleeding and dry socket (alveolar osteitis). The type of gauze employed and other aspects of the extraction site treatment are crucial for the healing and retention of the clot. Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate pain levels, healing progress, and patient satisfaction while comparing the efficacy of wet and dry gauze in preventing dry socket after molar extractions. Methods: Two groups—wet gauze (Group A) and dry gauze (Group B)—were randomly assigned to 200 patients having molar extractions. On the third and seventh postoperative days, the incidence of dry socket, visual analog scale discomfort, wound healing, and general patient satisfaction were tracked. Results: In contrast to the dry gauze group, which saw a rate of 15% on Day 3 and 21% on Day 7, the wet gauze group experienced a much lower incidence of dry socket (4% on Day 3 and 6% on Day 7). The moist gauze group saw consistently reduced pain levels and far better healing; on Day 7, 94% of wet gauze patients had satisfactory healing, compared to 75% of the dry gauze group. Additionally, the wet gauze group had higher patient satisfaction. Conclusion: After molar extractions, wet gauze greatly lowers the danger of dry socket, lessens pain, speeds up healing, and improves patient comfort. The recommended method for post-extraction care should be wet gauze.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Blum, I. (2002). Contemporary views on dry socket (alveolar osteitis): A clinical appraisal of standardization, aetiopathogenesis and management: a critical review. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 31(3), 309-317. https://doi.org/10.1054/ijom.2002.0263

Cardoso, C. L., Rodrigues, M. T., Júnior, O. F., Garlet, G. P., & De Carvalho, P. S. (2010). Clinical concepts of dry socket. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 68(8), 1922-1932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.085

Kolokythas, A., Olech, E., & Miloro, M. (2010). Alveolar osteitis: A comprehensive review of concepts and controversies. International Journal of Dentistry, 2010, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/249073

Sweet, J. B., & Butler, D. P. (1979). The relationship of smoking to localized osteitis. Journal of Oral Surgery (American Dental Association: 1965), 37(10), 732-735. https://europepmc.org/article/med/289736

Sweet, J. B., & Butler, D. P. (1978). Predisposing and operative factors: Effect on the incidence of localized osteitis in mandibular third-molar surgery. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, 46(2), 206-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(78)90195-0

Mohammed H, A. Y. (2011). Dry socket: Frequency, clinical picture, and risk factors in a Palestinian dental teaching center. The Open Dentistry Journal, 5(1), 7-12. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601105010007

Bortoluzzi, M. C., Capella, D. L., Barbieri, T., Marchetti, S., Dresch, C. P., & Tirello, C. (2012). Does smoking increase the incidence of postoperative complications in simple exodontia? International Dental Journal, 62(2), 106-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1875-595x.2011.00098.x

Guyton, A. C. (2006). Text book of medical physiology. China.

Manoharan, S., Varghese, K., & Sadhanandan, M. (2015). Evaluation of bleeding following dental extraction in patients on long-term antiplatelet therapy: A clinical trial. Indian Journal of Dental Research, 26(3), 252. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.162893

Fonseca, Raymond J. (2018). Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery, 3rd Ed. Elsevier.

Langdon, J. D., Patel, M. F., Ord, R., & Brennan, P. A. (Eds.). (2017). Operative oral and maxillofacial surgery. CRC Press.

Ferneini, E. M., & Goupil, M. T. (Eds.). (2019). Evidence-based oral surgery: a clinical guide for the general dental practitioner. United States of America: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91361-2

Kumar, S., Paul, A., Chacko, R., & Deepika, S. (2019). Time required for haemostasis under pressure from dental extraction socket. Indian Journal of Dental Research, 30(6), 894. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_93_18

Al-Mubarak, S., Al-Ali, N., Rass, M. A., Al-Sohail, A., Robert, A., Al-Zoman, K., Al-Suwyed, A., & Ciancio, S. (2007). Evaluation of dental extractions, suturing and INR on postoperative bleeding of patients maintained on oral anticoagulant therapy. British Dental Journal, 203(7), E15-E15. https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2007.725

Yanamoto, S., Hasegawa, T., Rokutanda, S., Komori, S., Tachibana, A., Kojima, Y., Koyama, Y., Shibuya, Y., Kurita, H., Komori, T., & Umeda, M. (2017). Multicenter retrospective study of the risk factors of hemorrhage after tooth extraction in patients receiving antiplatelet therapy. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 75(7), 1338-1343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2017.02.023