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.