Role of Mercurochrome and Chloromycetin in the Management of Dry Socket: A Clinical Study With a New Approach

Headnote

Abstract

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a common and painful complication after tooth extraction. The incidence of dry socket ranges from 3% to 20% with a higher frequency after the extraction of mandibular posterior teeth. Although the etiology of dry socket is debated, it is probably multifactorial, and its pathogenesis remains unknown. There are various well-established preventive measures against dry socket. Despite the number of remedies available for dry socket, we have tried a new combination of drugs ie., Mercuroclirome and Chloromycetin, which yields effective results in the management of dry socket.

Keywords: Dry socket; Chloromycetin; Mercurochrome; alveolar osteitis; extraction.

Introduction

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a painful complication after tooth extraction mainly traumatic, which affects millions of patients around the world. Dry socket has been used in the literature since 1896, when it was first described by Crawford.1 This painful condition can be avoided in a majority of cases by proper understanding. It will save unnecessary agony to patients and loss of countless hours of dentist's practice in dealing with it.

Dry socket is an acute, non-suppurative inflammatory process localized in the dental alveolus and is character¬ized by late onset (2-4 days post extraction), severe and radiating pain, absence of typical inflammatory signs, unpleasant taste, fetid odour, empty socket, gingival infla¬mmation, regional lymphadenopathy and sensitivity of intake of food or drinks.2 The pain increases on mastica¬tion and interferes with the normal activity of the patient.

The main characteristic of the dry socket is the denuded appearance of the socket due to disintegration of blood clot leaving behind a gray or grayish yellow bony socket bare of granulation tissue. The diagnosis is confirmed by gently passing a small probe into the extraction wound; in the alveolar osteitis bare bone is encountered, which is extremely sensitive. The pain is caused by the thermal and chemical irritation of the exposed terminal nerve endings in lamina dura lining the alveolar socket and in the remnants of periodontal ligament to air, food and liquids that enters the mouth. It is also named as focal osteo¬myelitis, alveolar osteitis, alveolitis sicca dolorosa and fibrinolytic alveolitis.3

In spite of the best care taken and aseptic technique used during extraction of a tooth, the incidence of dry socket formation varies from 0% to more than 30%.4 It occurs more frequently in mandibular molars particularly third molars with an incidence of 20% to 30% and is more with single tooth extraction as compared to multiple tooth extr¬actions.5'6

Pathogenesis

The pathogenicity of dry socket formation is not yet fully established, but it may be produced by a combination of several following predisposing factors:

1. Use of excessive amount of adrenaline containing local anaesthetic which reduces the blood supply to the area.7

2. Excessive irrigation and curettage of socket during extraction.38

3. Presence of root and/or bone fragment, foreign body like calculus in the socket.3

4. Excessive spitting, rinsing and sucking of wound foll¬owing extraction.3

5. Poor oral hygiene, smoking, sneezing predispose to the formation of dry socket as it can impede healing of wounds, possibly due to the decreased amount of oxy¬gen available in the healing tissues.9

6. Insufficient blood supply of the bone particularly in aged patients because of sclerosis of bone and other debilitating diseases like diabetes, anemia etc.3'9

7. The female patients on oral contraceptives are at higher risk of developing dry socket as estrogen slows down the healing process.9

8. Fibrinolytic and proteolytic activity in the blood clot because of infection due to anaerobic micro-organisms especially Treponema denticola, an anaerobic spirochete with lytic capacity followed by Fusiform bacilli and Streptococci appear to have a role in the onset of dry socket.26

9. Pre-existing infection like periapical infection, period¬ontitis andpericoronitis.3

10. Poor sterilization of the instruments, septic surgical procedure and excessive instrumentation during extra¬ction.10

By avoiding all possible adverse factors, risk of dry socket formation can be reduced. There are various well-established preventive measures like meticulous approach to the extraction along with atraumatic extraction and aspectic procedures, providing antibiotics, anti-fibrinoly-tics and physical methods that promote or accelerate alveolarreconstruction such as use of softlaser.1114

Various treatments like prescribing analgesics and antibi¬otics, mouth rinses with tetracycline solution, packing of obtundent dressing like zinc oxide eugenol, topical anaest¬hetic like benzocaine, following local irrigation of the socketwith warm sterile isotonic saline solution or a dilute hydrogen peroxide solution to remove necrotic materials and other debris have been recommended from time to time. Mercurochrome, Covamycin D, corticosteroids and non steroidal anti-inflammatory medication for the mana¬gement of pain and inflammation after third molar surgery have also been tried.1517 Curettage of the socket not only predisposes the patient to the spread of infection but also destroys any previous attempt at normal healing.18 21

In the present study we have evaluated the combined use of Mercurochrome and Chloromycetin. The study is aimed to evaluate their role in the treatment of dry socket for immediate relief of pain.

Materials and method

A prospective clinical trial on 50 patients with a history of dry socket was conducted over aperiod of 6 months irresp¬ective of age, sex, race in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at Swami Devi Dyal Dental College and Hospital, Barwala. The patients with the history of allergy to some antibiotics or local anesthesia, those recei¬ving treatment for hepatic or renal insufficiency, immuno¬deficiency, blood dyscrasia, pregnant and even breast feedingpatients were excludedfromthe study.

The patients reported with the history of dry socket with major complaint of severe radiating pain 2-3 days after the extraction; we decided to apply a combination pack of Mercurochrome and Chloromycetin in the empty socket for immediate pain relief. Random blood samples of the treated patients were taken to know the effect of topical Chloromycetin on blood cell count.

Mercurochrome solution was prepared by dissolving 5gm of Mercurochrome crystals in sufficient distilled water to make 100ml solution. First of all the entire socket was cleaned and irrigated with 3% weak hydrogen peroxide solution (an effective germicidal chemical which kills germs by oxidation process) to remove the debris. Then a sterilized cotton pledget was soaked in Mercurochrome solution and the part of pledget, which was to face fundus of the socket, was coated with Chloromycetin powder and packed in the empty socket. The dressing was kept softand loose to minimize the chances of spread of infection from the socket. Afterwards a cotton pack was given for half an hour to prevent leakage of Chloromycetin in the oral cavity so as to minimize its bitter taste. Patient was advised to chew some candy in order to minimize the bitter taste and warm saline gargles after 3 hours, 3-4 times a day and take some analgesics if painpersists. The dressing was removed after a day. In majority of the patients, there was no need to repeat the dressing. A visual analogue scale was used to measure the intensity of pain in all the patients with dry socket.

Results

The chief complaint of all the patients with the history of dry socket was shooting pain 2nd or 3rd day postoperatively. Post-operative healing was excellent with no pain on first day in majority of the patients which was asked on the basis of visual analogue scale. Healing took place by secondary intention. Outof 50 patients, 5 patients reported with empty socket with dislogdement of pack and 3 patients reported with mild tolerable pain on first day. All the patients were prescribed analgesics on demand post-operatively but mo¬st of the patients did not require analgesics after the dressing.

Discussion

Dry socket is a painful complication which occurs routin¬ely in the clinics. It is characterized by severe pain which starts on the 2nd or 3rd day post-operatively. The generally accepted aetiology of dry socket is an increased local fibrinolysis leading to disintegration of the clot.7 Surgical trauma during extraction of teeth leading to liberation of different tissue activators and bacterial infections remain the 2 most initiating factors of this localized fibrinolytic activity.22

Most of the studies have given the incidence of dry socket in all extractions as ranging from 2%-4.4% and as high as 12.5% where as in third molar extractions, the incidence of dry socket is from 0.5%-15%.7'22'23 This is largely due to differences in diagnostic criteria and in the methods of ass¬essment, surgical techniques or surgical skill.2425 In this study, a minimum of pain and an empty socket with food debris and shiver pieces of blood were considered diagn¬ostic.

In this study, the clinical picture in all the patients of dry socket was that of pain and empty sockets which is in agre¬ement with the findings of several authors.5'24'26'27 The average onset of symptoms in our study was found to be on 2nd or 3rd days post-operatively but in some studies it was around 3 6 hours after the extraction which was due to other post-operative complications such as swelling and trismus. Cases in which the onset was a little more delayed is explai¬ned by the notion that an infection process was needed to liberate tissue activators and pain mediators. The neurolo¬gical pain of dry socket is believed to be related to the relea¬se of kinins following tissue trauma.26'28

Pain was the chief complaint in all the patients with dry socket. The prevention of dry socket is desirable and a number of studies have shown the efficacy of different preventive measures which include use of topical peni¬cillin; dry socket dressings like zinc oxide eugenol which is placed snugly in the extraction socket; washing the area with 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate; application of Tran-examic acid to alveolar sockets; topical antibiotics such as metronidazole, tetracycline, amoxicillin, clindamycin and lincomycingel foam.13'22'2730They are frequently associated with post-operative pain, require repeated dressings, forei¬gn body reaction, neuritis and more chances of infect¬ion.14'1821

The management of dry socket has witnessed many revie¬ws over the years like topical viscous 2% lidocaine jelly, use of clindamycin and buccoadhesive metronida-zole tablets or topical metronidazole.27'30'31 As indicated by Faz-akerley et al., the primary consideration in the treatment of dry socket is pain control until commence-ment of normal healing, and in the majority of cases local measures are satisfactory.32 In this study mercurochrome and Chloromy¬cetin dressing was used in the treatment of dry socket for immediate relief of pain. In majority of patients there was no need of a second dressing. Mercurochrome is an antise¬ptic and an organo mercuric disodium salt compound which depolarizes the resting membrane potential slightly but completely blocks conduction of the propagated action potential. Mercurochrome has a disadvantage that it may contain metal mercury but no study till date has definitely linked Mercurochrome with mercury poisoning. Mercuro¬chrome cause dark reddish to brown staining of the oral mucosa which persisted for 30-60 minutes.

Chloromycetin, is abroad spectrum bactericidal antibiotic and is effective against gram +ve, gram -ve and anaerobic bacteria. It is an inexpensive and readily available drug. On systemic use, its disadvantage is reversible i.e., bone marrow toxicity and rarely aplastic anaemia. In our study cases we have applied it topically as a broad-spectrum anti¬bacterial agent to combat the infective component in the dry socket despite of its bitter taste. Chloromycetin, which is highly hygroscopic, is available in powdered form in 1 gm vial and is well known for causing bone marrow depr¬ession on systemic use but we have not found this as a clinical problem in any of our patients.

Pain in dry socket is due to irritation of the nerve endings, in the lamina dura lining the alveolar socket. Besides being an antiseptic, Mercurochrome acts as an obtundent by completely blocking conduction of the propagated action potential and control the pain component which is frequ¬ently associated with dry socket. Chloromycetin was used as a topical antibacterial agent since it is a broad-spectrum antibiotic.

The following study introduces anew, simple and effective method to manage the dry socket. The highlight of this study was the total loss of pain after a single dressing in most of the cases obviating the need for analgesics.

Conclusion

The occurrence of dry socket in everyday dental practice is unavoidable. Treatment options for this condition are gen¬erally limited and directed towards palliative care. Combi¬ned use of Mercurochrome and Chloromycetin is an effective single sitting dressing and well-tolerated in the management of dry socket. Further study is warranted to evaluate the use of combination of Mercurochrome and Chloromycetin in the management of dry socket in comp¬arison with other conventional treatments.

References

References

1.Crawford JY. Dry socket. Dent Cosmos 1896;38:929-33.

2.Nitzan DW. On the genesis of dry socket. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1983;41:706-10.

3.Laskin DM. Textbook of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Vol 2, 7*1" edn. St. Louis and Toronto: CV Mosby Co, 1989; 42-43.

4.Erickson RT, Wait DE, Wilkison RH. A study of dry sockets. Oral Surg 1960;13:1046-50.

5.Lilly GE, Osborn DB, Rael EM, Samuels HS, Jones JC. Alveolar osteitis associated with mandibular third molar extractions. JAmDentAssoc 1974;88:802-06.

6.Catellani JE. Review of factors contributing to dry socket through enhanced fibrinolysis. J Oral Surg 1979;37:42-46.

7.MacGregor AJ. Aetiology of dry socket: A clinical investig¬ation. Br J Oral Surg 1968;6:49-58.

8.Seldin HM. Accidents in exodontias and how to avoid them. Dent Items 1993;55:705-10.

9.Bonine FL. Effect of chlorhexidine rinse on the incidence of dry socket in impacted mandibular third molar extraction sites. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;79:154-58.

10.Krogh HW. Incidence of dry socket. J Am Dent Assoc 1937; 24:1829-36.

11.Bascones A, Bullon P, Castillo JR, Machuca G, Manso F J, Serrano JS. Bases farmacologrcas de la terapeutica odontol-ogica. EditorialAvances. Madrid, 2000;247-75.

12.Sweet JB, Butler DP. Predisposing and operative factors: Effect on the incidence of localized osteitis in mandibular third molar surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1978; 46:206-15.

13.Ragno JR, SzkutnikAS. Evaluation of 0.12% Chlorhexidine rinse on the prevention of alveolar osteitis. Oral Surg Oral Med OralPathol 1991;72:524-26.

14.Larsen PE. The effect of a chlorhexidine rinse on the incidence of alveolar osteitis following the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49:932-37.

15.Jones EF Dental section. J Natl Med Assoc 1940;32:89-91.

16.van Eeden SP, Biitow K. Post-operative sequelae of lower third molar removal: a literature review and pilot study on the effect ofCovomycinD.SADJ 2006;61:154-59.

17.Kim K, Brar P, Jakubowski J, Kaltman S, Lopez E. The use of corticosteroids and non-steroidal antiinflammatory me¬dication for the management of pain and inflammation after third molar surgery: areview of the literature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009; 107:630-40.

18.DoldEayEscodaCArnabatJ.Laprevendondelaalve-olitis seca. Rev Eur Odontoestomatol 1992;4:261-70.

19.Vezeau PJ. Dental extraction wound management: Medicating post extraction sockets. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58:531-37.

20.Briner WW, Grossmann E,Buckner RY, Rebitski GF, Sox TE, Setser RE, Ebert ML. Assessment of susceptibility of plague bacteria to chlorhexidine after six months oral use. J PeriodontResl986;21(Suppll6):53-59.

21.Meechan JG, Seymour RA The use of third molar surgery in clinical pharmacology. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1993;31: 360-65.

22.22.Goldman DR, Kilgore DS, Panzer ID, Atkinson WH. Prevention of dry socket by local application of lincomycin in gelfoam. Oral Surg 1973;35:472-74.

23.Khandker MH, Molla MR, Incidence of dry socket in surgical removal of impacted third molar. Bangladesh Med Res Council Bull 1994;20:60-67.

24.Birn H. Etiology and pathogenesis of fibrinolytic alveolitis. IntJOral Surg 1973;2:215-63.

25.al-Khateeb TL, el-MasafiAI, Butler NP The relationship between the indications for surgical removal of impacted third molar and the incidence of alveolar osteitis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49:141-45.

26.FMdEASpeechleyJARotter E, Scott J. Dry socket inci¬dence compared after a 12-year interval. Br J Oral Maxillo fac Surg 1985;23:419-27.

27.MacGregorAJ,AddyA.Valueofpenicillinintheprevention of pain, swelling and trimus following the removal of ectopic thirdmolars. Int J Oral Surg 1980;9:166-72.

28.Upadhyaya C, Humagam M. Prevalence of dry socket foll¬owing extraction of permanent teeth at Kathmandu University Teaching Hospital (KUTH), Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal:Astudy.KathmanduUnivMedJ2010;8:18-24.

29.Gersel Pedersen N. Tranexamic acid in alveolar sockets in the prevention of alveolitis sicca dolorosa. Int J Oral Surg 1979;8:421-29.

30.Ahuja A, Hhar RK, Chaudhry R. Evaluation of metroni¬dazole tablets: Microbiological response. Pharmazie 1998;53:264-67.

31.Berts NJ, Makowski G, Shen YH, Hersh EV. Evaluation of topical viscous 2% lidocaine jelly as an adjunct during pain management of alveolar osteitis J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995;53:1140-44.

32.Fazakerley M, Field EN, Dry socket: a painful post-extrac¬tion complication: Areview. Dental update 1991;18:31-34.