Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

275 questions · 299 findings · 21 reviews · Oral and maxillofacial surgery

No studies found 50 · 16.7%GRADE not reported 207 · 69.2%Very low 17 · 5.7%Low 20 · 6.7%Moderate 5 · 1.7%High 0 · 0%

Chlorhexidine 0.2% socket irrigation (monoject syringe) vs Chlorhexidine 0.2% mouthrinse

Presence of dry socket · Adults (>18 years) having permanent tooth extraction (predominantly mandibular third molars)

Chlorhexidine 0.2% socket irrigation (monoject syringe) led to lower presence of dry socket compared with chlorhexidine 0.2% mouthrinse; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Topical anaesthetic gel (prilocaine-lidocaine) vs Eugenol

Pain at 48 hours (VAS 0-10) · Adults (>18 years) with established dry socket following permanent tooth extraction

Topical anaesthetic gel (prilocaine-lidocaine) showed no clear difference in pain at 48 hours (VAS 0-10) compared with eugenol; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine gel (0.2%, intrasocket) vs Chlorhexidine mouthrinse

Presence of dry socket · Adults (>18 years) having permanent tooth extraction (predominantly mandibular third molars)

Chlorhexidine gel (0.2%, intrasocket) showed no clear difference in presence of dry socket compared with chlorhexidine rinse (0.12%) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Tap water irrigation (monoject syringe) vs No rinsing

Presence of dry socket · Adults (>18 years) having permanent tooth extraction (predominantly mandibular third molars)

Tap water irrigation (monoject syringe) led to lower presence of dry socket compared with no rinsing; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine gel vs Chlorhexidine, 0.2% to 2% (solution or gel)

Presence of dry socket · Adults (>18 years) having permanent tooth extraction (predominantly mandibular third molars)

Chlorhexidine gel 1% showed no clear difference in presence of dry socket compared with chlorhexidine gel 0.2%; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Honey (Manuka, topical) vs Chlorhexidine rinse (0.2%)

Presence of dry socket · Adults (>18 years) having permanent tooth extraction (predominantly mandibular third molars)

Honey (Manuka, topical) showed no clear difference in presence of dry socket compared with chlorhexidine rinse (0.2%); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Chlorhexidine gel (0.2%, intrasocket) vs placebo or no treatment

Presence of dry socket · Adults (>18 years) having permanent tooth extraction (predominantly mandibular third molars)

Chlorhexidine gel (0.2%, intrasocket) probably leads to lower presence of dry socket compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Artemisia desertorum spreng (Shahaosan) vs Artemisia desertorum spreng (Yunnan)

Presence of dry socket · Adults (>18 years) having permanent tooth extraction (predominantly mandibular third molars)

Artemisia desertorum spreng (Shahaosan) showed no clear difference in presence of dry socket compared with artemisia desertorum spreng (Yunnan); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Two lag screws vs One lag screw (with arch bars and IMF)

Restoration of function (occlusion) · Adults (16 to 68 years) with mandibular fractures excluding condylar involvement
1 finding from 1 review
  • Restoration of the original occlusion, assessed visually, was similar in both groups (P>0.05); occlusal correction was not achieved in one participant in the two-lag-screws group. Surrogate/proxy outcome.
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

3-dimensional (3D) miniplates vs Standard (Champy) plates

Requirement for additional (surgical) interventions (post-operative MMF/IMF) · Adults (16 to 68 years) with mandibular fractures excluding condylar involvement

3-dimensional (3D) miniplates led to lower requirement for additional (surgical) interventions (post-operative… compared with standard (Champy) plates; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open (surgical) reduction and fixation vs Closed (non-surgical) treatment

Outcome not reported · Adults (16 to 68 years) with mandibular fractures excluding condylar involvement

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • "There were no studies comparing different types of closed interventions with one another or comparing open and closed interventions." "We found no studies that compared surgical with non-surgical treatments."
    0 studies
    No studies found

2 mm titanium plates vs 2.5 mm bioresorbable plates

Restoration of function (inability to chew hard food) · Adults (16 to 68 years) with mandibular fractures excluding condylar involvement

2 mm titanium plates showed no clear difference in restoration of function (inability to chew hard food) compared with 2.5 mm bioresorbable plates; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review