- Joined
- May 1, 2006
- Messages
- 514
- Reaction score
- 43
During residency I did all my matrixectomies by physically removing the matrix with a blade because the hospital banned phenol, so I only did chemical matrixectomies a few times at private practices. Now that I'm in my own practice I have been debating which chemical to use. Why don't more practitioners use sodium hydroxide for the matrixectomies over phenol?
I did my research on both and NaOH seems like an easy choice. Yet, I've asked over 30 podiatrists the past year and they all use phenol. They said they've had no problems with it and that's the way they were taught. Is phenol that much better than NaOH?
Benefits of NaOH over phenol:
-Costs significantly less
-Don't have to pay for hazard fees when being shipped.
-Studies have shown patients heal quicker with NaOH and preferred over phenol for diabetics.
-Less time application (3x10 seconds vs 3-4 x 30 seconds)
-Shown to have the same success rate as phenol.
-Easy to neutralize with acetic acid.
-Less inflammation.
It seems like the obvious choice for matrixectomies, what's everyones thoughts?
I did my research on both and NaOH seems like an easy choice. Yet, I've asked over 30 podiatrists the past year and they all use phenol. They said they've had no problems with it and that's the way they were taught. Is phenol that much better than NaOH?
Benefits of NaOH over phenol:
-Costs significantly less
-Don't have to pay for hazard fees when being shipped.
-Studies have shown patients heal quicker with NaOH and preferred over phenol for diabetics.
-Less time application (3x10 seconds vs 3-4 x 30 seconds)
-Shown to have the same success rate as phenol.
-Easy to neutralize with acetic acid.
-Less inflammation.
It seems like the obvious choice for matrixectomies, what's everyones thoughts?
Last edited: