AIM: The aim of this exploratory study was to analyse prevalence of extraction sockets showing erratic healing and evaluate factors potentially impeding healing. METHODS: Erratic healing was defined as extraction sites showing clinical observations of fibrous scar tissue occupying the extraction site rather than bone following 12 or more weeks of healing. Computerized tomography was used to evaluate characteristics and calculate Hounsfield unit scores for sites showing erratic healing. RESULTS: A total of 1226 dental records from Seoul National University Dental Hospital archives including patients subject to extractions prior to implant placement were evaluated. Seventy subjects (5.71%) and 97 sites (4.24%) exhibited erratic extraction socket healing. Maxillary incisor/canine sites showed the lowest (0.47%), whereas mandibular molar sites the highest (5.41%) occurrence. In the multivariable analysis, erratic healing was more likely to occur in subjects <60 years old (OR = 2.23, 95%CI = 1.26-3.94), subjects with hypertension (OR = 2.37, 95%CI = 1.24-4.55), in molar sites (OR = 4.91, 95%CI = 1.41-17.07), and following single tooth extractions (OR = 2.98, 95%CI = 1.36-6.53). Computerized tomography showed the highest incidence of bone loss for the buccal wall (49.3%). CONCLUSION: Erratic extraction socket healing appears a not uncommon sequel and local factors seem to be major contributors to its occurrence.
AIM: The aim of this exploratory study was to analyse prevalence of extraction sockets showing erratic healing and evaluate factors potentially impeding healing. METHODS: Erratic healing was defined as extraction sites showing clinical observations of fibrous scar tissue occupying the extraction site rather than bone following 12 or more weeks of healing. Computerized tomography was used to evaluate characteristics and calculate Hounsfield unit scores for sites showing erratic healing. RESULTS: A total of 1226 dental records from Seoul National University Dental Hospital archives including patients subject to extractions prior to implant placement were evaluated. Seventy subjects (5.71%) and 97 sites (4.24%) exhibited erratic extraction socket healing. Maxillary incisor/canine sites showed the lowest (0.47%), whereas mandibular molar sites the highest (5.41%) occurrence. In the multivariable analysis, erratic healing was more likely to occur in subjects <60 years old (OR = 2.23, 95%CI = 1.26-3.94), subjects with hypertension (OR = 2.37, 95%CI = 1.24-4.55), in molar sites (OR = 4.91, 95%CI = 1.41-17.07), and following single tooth extractions (OR = 2.98, 95%CI = 1.36-6.53). Computerized tomography showed the highest incidence of bone loss for the buccal wall (49.3%). CONCLUSION: Erratic extraction socket healing appears a not uncommon sequel and local factors seem to be major contributors to its occurrence.