Ridge Dimensional Changes: A Comparative Study of Socket Compression After Dental Extraction with No Compression

Abstract

Exodontia, or extraction of teeth, has been a well-documented dental treatment that forms one of the foundations of dentistry. The steps associated with extracting teeth have changed little in the last century and these steps are largely part of the dogma of dentistry. One such step is that of socket compression post-extraction. Rationale for socket compression after extraction is manifold. They include: shorter healing times, fewer dry sockets and re-approximating walls that were stretched in the elevation and delivery stages of extractions. The purpose of this study was to determine if post-extraction ridge compression negatively affected alveolar ridge dimensions when compared to sites that are not compressed post-extraction. Secondary outcome measures will identify if socket compression/re-approximation affects the rate of soft tissue closure or occurrence of alveolar osteitis. In this study, 14 subjects were recruited. Eight subjects formed the compression group, while six formed the non-compression group. The subjects in the compression group received compression of their alveolar ridges after extraction to approximate their original pre-extraction width. The subjects in the non-compression group did not receive ridge compression. Each subject had pre-extraction and post-extraction CBCT scans along with post-operative follow up visits at 1, 2, and 4 weeks post-extraction. The present investigation found that with respect to changes in ridge width, sites that were compressed did not lose significantly more dimension than those that were not. With respect to ridge height, sites that were compressed did not lose significantly more dimension than those that were not. Sites that were compressed and sites that were not, healed at approximately the same rate, with respect to soft tissue closure. While the results showed a lack of statistical significance between both groups, there appears to be a trend towards the ridge compression group having a smaller ridge width. Such a trend was not noted with soft tissue closure, thereby invalidating the rationale for socket compression after extraction. One of the limitations of this pilot study is the small sample size. Further validation of these results must be done with a larger sample size in order to provide clinical guidance to dental practitioners.