Original Article

Localized alveolar osteitis: the role of suture technique following disimpaction of mandibular third molars in a Nigerian Teaching Hospital

Thomas Owobu, Auwal S. Balarabe, Sylvester Nwabueze, Babatunde O. Bamgbose

Thomas Owobu
Department of Dental and Maxillofacial, Federal Medical Center, Nguru, Yobe State

Auwal S. Balarabe
Department of Child Dental Health, Faculty of Dentistry, Bayero University Kano, Kano

Sylvester Nwabueze
Nigerian Army Level 11 Hospital, Damaturu, Yobe State

Babatunde O. Bamgbose
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology and Surgery, Lagos University Teaching Hospital, Lagos, Nigeria. Email: drtundebamgbose@yahoo.com
Online First: December 01, 2019 | Cite this Article
Owobu, T., Balarabe, A., Nwabueze, S., Bamgbose, B. 2019. Localized alveolar osteitis: the role of suture technique following disimpaction of mandibular third molars in a Nigerian Teaching Hospital. Journal of Dentomaxillofacial Science 4(3): 128-132. DOI:10.15562/jdmfs.v4i3.937


Objective: The formation of localized alveolar osteitis following mandibular third molar disimpaction is a result of a complex interaction between systemic factors, local infection and surgical trauma. This study evaluates the relationship between wound closure techniques in the development of localized alveolar osteitis (Dry Socket) following disimpaction of mandibular third molar teeth in Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital.

Material and Methods:  A total of 120 patients between the ages of 18 and 45 years were recruited into the study. A gender ratio of male to female, 1,07 :1, was recorded.  They were then divided into two groups (A & B) according to wound closure technique used.  Group A had suture-less/partial wound closure and Group B had complete wound closure technique. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago IL), with simple descriptive statistics and the X2 text, as appropriate. P < .05 was considered significant.

Results: A total number of 23 patients (7.2%) developed localized alveolar osteitis from both groups. The prevalence of localized alveolar osteitis was higher in patients who received suture-less/partial wound closure technique (91.3%), while (8.7%) developed dry socket in complete wound closure technique. The difference between the two group was statistically significant (p<0.05).

Conclusion: This study revealed that wound closure technique following disimpaction of mandibular third molar teeth is a major factor in the development of localized alveolar osteitis.

References

Peterson LJ, Ellis E III, Hupp JR, et al. Contemporary oral and maxillofacial surgery. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1998. p. 215-48.

Wong JD. Alveolar osteitis: a review. Sydney: Dentistry Library University of Sydney; 1993.

Alexander RE. Dental extraction wound management: a case against medicating postextraction sockets. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58: 538-551.

Erickson RI, Waite DE, Wilkison RH. A study of dry sockets. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1960;13: 1046-1050.

Oluseye SB. Exodontia: a retrospective study of the reasons, methods and complications of tooth extraction in oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic, Lagos University Teaching Hospital. NPMC dissertation. National postgraduate medical college of Nigeria 1993.

Awang MN. The aetiology of dry socket: a review. Int Dent J 1989;39: 236-240.

Noroozi AR, Philbert RF. Modern concepts in understanding and management of the “dry socket” syndrome: comprehensive review of the literature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;107: 30-35.

Saheeb BD, Obuekwe ON. An audit of mandibular third molar surgery. Nig J Surg Res 2001;3: 66-74.

Belinfante LS, Marlow CD, Myers W, et al. Incidence of dry socket complication in third molar removal. J Oral Surg 1973;31: 106-108.

Kumar V, Chaudhary M, Singh S, et al. Post-surgical evaluation of dry socket formation after surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar-a prospective study. Open J Stomatol 2012.

Anighoro EO, Gbotolorun OM, Adewole RA, et al. Assessment of the effect of wound closure technique on postoperative sequelae and complications after impacted mandibular third molar extraction. Open J Stomatol 2013;3: 527-532.

Jabber JK. A comparison between primary and secondary wound closure after surgical removal of lower third molars according to pain and swellin. MDJ 2008.

Schow SR. Evaluation of postoperative localized osteitis in mandibular third molar surgery. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Pathol 1974;38: 352-358.

Birn H. Etiology and pathogenesis of fibrinolytic alveolitis (dry socket). Int J Oral Surg 1973;2: 215.

Fridrich KL, Olson RAJ. Alveolar osteitis following surgical removal of mandibular third molars. Anesth Prog 1990;37: 32-41.

Lilly GE, Osbon DB, Rael EM, et al. Alveolar osteitis associated with mandibular third molar extractions. J Am Dent Assoc 1974;88: 802-806.

Larsen PE. Alveolar osteitis after surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars: Identification of the patient at risk. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Pathol 1992;73: 393-397.

Sweet JB, Butler DP. Effect of smoking on the incidence of localized osteitis following mandibular third molar surgery. Quintessence Int 1978;9: 7-10.

Sweet JB, Butler DP. predisposing and operative factor: effect on the incidence of localized osteitis in mandibular third molar surgery. Oral Surg 1978;46: 206.

Blum IR. Contemporary views on dry socket (alveolar osteitis): A clinical appraisal of standardization, aetiopathogenesis and management: a critical review. Int J Oral & Maxillofac Surg 2002;31: 309-317.

Al-Belasy FA. The relationship of “shisha” (water pipe) smoking to postextraction dry socket. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;62: 10-14.

Cohen ME, Simecek JW. Effects of gender-related factors on the incidence of localized alveolar osteitis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;79: 416.

Swanson AE. Reducing the incidence of dry socket: a clinical appraisal. J Dent Assoc S Afr 1966;21: 155-162.

Sorensen DC, Preisch J. The effect of tetracycline on the incidence of postextraction alveolar osteitis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1987;45: 1029.

Fotos P, Koorbusch GF, Sarasin D, et al. Evaluation of intraalveolar chlorhexidine dressing after removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1992;73: 383.

McGrath C, Comfort MB, Lo EC, et al. Changes in quality of life following third molar surgery- the immediate postoperative period. Br Dent J 2003;194: 265-268.

Pederson A. Inter-relationship of complaints after removal of impacted third molars. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1985;14: 241-247.

Chiapasco M, De Cicco L, Marrone G. Side effects and complications associated with third molar surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993;76: 412-420.

American Association of Oral Maxillofacial Surgeons: Report of a workshop on the management of patients with third molar teeth. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg 2013;52: 1102.

National Institute of Dental Research. Removal of Third Molars. NIH Consensus Development Program Statement; 1979. p. 65-68.

Archer WH. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 5th ed. Philadelphia: WB Sounders Co.; 1975. p. 321-335.

Blondeau F, Daniel MG. Extraction of impacted mandibular third molars: postoperative complications and their risk factors. J Can Dent Assoc 2007;73: 235-325.

Adeyemo WL, Bamgbose BO, Obi EV, et al. Effect of age, impaction types and operative time on inflammatory tissue reactions following lower third molar surgery. Head Face Med 2011;7: 8-11.

Peterson LJ, Ellis E III, Hupp JR, et al. Management of impacted teeth. Contemporary Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1998. p. 215-248.

Fisher SE, Frame JW, Route PGJ. Factors affecting the onset and severity of pain following the surgical removal of unilateral impacted mandibular third molar teeth. Bri Dent J 1998;164: 351-357.

Julia F, Newton G, Jon L. Differences in postoperative pain severity among four ethnic groups. J Pain Symptom Manag1994;9: 383-389.

Saheeb BD, Obuekwe ON. An audit of mandibular third molar surgery. Nig J Surg Res 2001;3: 66-74.

García GA, Gude SF, Gallas TM, et al. Trismus and pain after removal of a lower third molar. Effects of raising a mucoperiosteal flap. Med Oral 2001;6: 391-396.

Suddhasthira T, Chaiwat S, Sattapongsda P. A comparative study of primary and secondary closure techniques after removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Thai J Oral & Maxillofac Surg 1991;5: 67-77.

Osunde OD, Adebola RA, Saheeb BD. A comparative study of the effect of suture-less and multiple suture techniques on inflammatory complications following third molar surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;41: 1275-1279.

McGrath C, Comfort MB, Lo EC, et al. Changes in quality of life following third molar surgery- the immediate postoperative period. Br Dent J 2003;194: 265-268.

Du-Bois DD, Pizer ME, Chinnis RJ. Comparison of primary and secondary closure techniques after removal of impacted mandibular third molars. J Oral Marillofac Surg 1982;4: 631-634.

Trieger N, Schlagel GD. Preventing dry socket. A simple procedure. J Am Dent Assoc 1991;122: 67.


No Supplementary Material available for this article.
Article Views      : 178
PDF Downloads : 112