Alpha 2.0
Login Register
» Articles » PMID: 38583113

The Hemostatic and Comforting Effects of Oral Adhesive Bandages in Tooth Extraction: a Randomized Controlled Clinical Study

Overview
Journal Clin Oral Investig
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2024 Apr 7
PMID 38583113
Authors
XiaoCheng Zhou
Yu Cai
Jihong Zhao
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To compare oral adhesive bandages with the classic compression method and evaluate the clinical efficacy of this wound dressing material in improving postoperative comfort, wound healing, and hemostasis in tooth extraction.

Materials And Methods: The study was designed as a randomized controlled clinical trial. A total of 120 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to the study group and the control group. In the study group, oral adhesive bandages were used as wound dressing. In the control group, patients bit on cotton balls and gauze, as usual. Hemorrhage, comfort, and healing levels were evaluated at postoperative 1 h, 24 h, and 7 days. The adhesion time of the oral adhesive bandages was also recorded.

Results: The average adhesion time of the oral adhesive bandages was 26.6 h. At postoperative 1 and 24 h, the hemostatic levels of the oral adhesive bandage group were significantly higher than those of the control group. The oral adhesive bandage group also reported significantly higher comfort scores than the control group. Both groups had similar healing levels and side effects. But the mean score for wound healing was slightly higher in the oral adhesive bandage group.

Conclusions: Oral adhesive bandages were more effective than cotton balls and gauze in providing hemostatic and comfort effects on extraction wounds.

Clinical Relevance: Oral adhesive bandages possess clinical value in the management of extraction wounds.

References
1.
Svensson P, Petersen J . Anesthetic effect of EMLA occluded with Orahesive oral bandages on oral mucosa. A placebo-controlled study. Anesth Prog. 1992; 39(3):79-82. PMC: 2148753. View
2.
Perez M, Fernandez I, Marquez D, Bretana R . Use of N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate in oral surgery: biological and clinical evaluation. Artif Organs. 2000; 24(3):241-3. DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1594.2000.06519.x. View
3.
Buonomo M, Warshaw E . Allergic contact dermatitis due to polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP)/eicosene copolymer. Contact Dermatitis. 2021; 85(4):458-460. DOI: 10.1111/cod.13878. View
4.
Wu J, Pan Z, Zhao Z, Wang M, Dong L, Gao H . Anti-Swelling, Robust, and Adhesive Extracellular Matrix-Mimicking Hydrogel Used as Intraoral Dressing. Adv Mater. 2022; 34(20):e2200115. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202200115. View
5.
Raghavan S, Panneerselvam E, Mudigonda S, Raja K . Protection of an intraoral surgical wound with a new dressing: a randomised controlled clinical trial. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 58(7):766-770. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.03.017. View