Fibrinolytic alveolitis, since 1896: Contemporary concepts and quandaries: contemporary concepts and quandaries.

Ziad E.F. Noujeim, Ziyad S. Haidar*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


During basic and specialized training, we’re often told that
socket preservation is standard of care. Today, we wonder, is it? If not, why
not? We were also voiced much about atraumatic extraction and the simple
technique of socket grafting, especially in areas where bone and soft tissue
shrinkage would impede proper pontic aesthetics and implant placement.
What about retained roots, trauma to other structures, damage to developing
(underlying) permanent teeth, and need for tension-less flaps at suture line?
Are dentists following? Do we in the smile zone, at least? Besides, why are
we still questioned, almost on a regular basis, by residents as well as fellow
clinicians whether to irrigate or not, post-extraction? Concerns, we thought
to address celebrating the end of 2017, or in better words, ~120 years since
coining the term “dry socket” for the first time.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)8-10
Number of pages3
JournalJournal of Oral Research
Issue number1
StatePublished - 22 Jan 2018

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was carried under an ongoing collaboration between Universidad de los Andes and Lebanese University; supported by operating grants provided to BioMAT’X (Laboratorio de Biomateriales, Farmacéuticos y Bioingeniería de Tejidos Cráneo Máxilo-Facial), member of CIIB (Centro de Investigación e Innovación Biomédica), through the Faculty of Dentistry and PMI (Danilo Segovia, Anil Sadarangani and Silvana Becerra) Univ. los Andes, Santiago de Chile and CONICYT-FONDEF (Grant ID# 16I10366).

Cite this