Comparing the effects of chlorhexidine and persica on alveolar bone healing following tooth extraction in rats, a randomised controlled trial.

Chlorhexidine is broadly prescribed by clinicians for treating extraction socket wounds; however, studies have reported adverse effects for chlorhexidine. Persica, a herbal antibacterial agent, could be an alternative for chlorhexidine. The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to investigate the effects of persica and chlorhexidine on alveolar bone healing following tooth extraction in rats. Eighteen Wistar rats were randomly allocated to three study groups: 0.2% chlorhexidine, 10% persica and controls (tap water). The rats were mouth-rinsed for 14 days. On day 8, the mandibular right first molars of all the rats were extracted. On day 21, the rats were euthanized and histological slides of their extraction sockets were prepared. The amount of new bone formation and the number of inflammatory cells in the extraction socket for each rat were recorded. Data were analysed using linear regression and Mann-Whitney tests. There was no significant difference between the control group and the intervention groups in terms of new bone formation and inflammatory cell count. The mean new bone formation was significantly higher in the persica group than in the chlorhexidine group. There was a significant association between new bone formation and inflammatory cell count in the entire sample. In conclusion, there were no significant differences between rinsing with tap water and rinsing with 0.2% chlorhexidine and 10% persica in enhancing extraction socket wound healing in rats. Extraction socket wound healing in rats was better enhanced with 10% persica than 0.2% chlorhexidine.