• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.661-670
• /
• 1994

It is well known that the application of dressings after periodontal surgery have benefits to provide the comforts to patient and to promote the healing process with action of bleeding control and temporary stabilization for the operated mobile teeth. But until recently the relationship between periodontal dressings and cells which are composed of periodontium has not been clear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cytotoxic effect of soluble extracts from the four different kinds of periodontal dressings, two of them were eugenol type (K.H.pack, Wondrpak) and the others were non-eugenol type (Coe-pak, Periocare), on the human gingival fibroblasts in vitro. Human gingival fibroblasts were primarily cultured from gingiva around third molar during the extraction for preventive purposes. Extracts solution were prepared with culture medium by means of imersing the consistent size of periodontal dressing made from plastic mold. Cell were inoculated into the 24 well plate with $3\;{\times}\;10^4\;cells/well$ of medium at $37\;^{\circ}C$, 100% of humidity, 5% of $CO_2$, incubator for 24 hours. After discard of the supernatant of medium, those cells were cultured with original, 1/2, 1/5, 1/10 diluted soluble extract for 24, 48 and 72 hours, and counted the number of cells using the hemocytometer at each designed time and concentration. Also, the cytotoxic effect of soluble extract was measured by Wataha's MTT assay method. In briefly, cells were inoculated and cultured into 96 well culture plate with $2\;{\times}\;10^4\;cells/well$ for 24 hours. Soluble extracts were applied to cultured cells and incubated for 48 hours at same condition. $50\;{\mu}l$ of MTT solution and DMSO were added into each well for the detection of absorbance with ELISA reader. The measured data were calculated by value of colorimetric assay for survival rate. The results were as follows ; In the case of eugenol type of dressing, original, 1/2 and 1/5 diluted extracts of K.H.pack showed very low survival rate. And original extract of Wondrpak showed strong cytotoxic effect and 1/2 diluted extract showed moderate cytotoxic effect. In the case of Non-eugenol type of dressings, only original extract of Coe-pak revealed strong cytotoxic effect and Periocare had little cytotoxic effect. It is concluded that eugenol type of dressings showed more cytotoxic effect than non-eugenol types. This study suggest that use of non-eugenol dressings after periodontal surgery is recommended.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.110.1-110.1
• /
• 1987

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.693-703
• /
• 1999

Since they were introduced by Ward in 1923, periodontal dressing have been routinely used following the periodontal surgery to avoid pain, infection, desensitizing teeth, inhibiting food impaction of the surgical areas, and immobilizing injured areas. Recently, however, the value of periodontal dressings and their effects on periodontal wound healing have been questioned, several authors have been reported that the use of dressing has little influence on healing following periodontal surgical procedures. In addition, there is evidence that when good flap adaptation is achieved, the use of a periodontal dressing does not add to patient comfort nor promote healing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient postoperative pain experience and discomfort with and without the use of periodontal dressing following periodontal surgery. Twenty-eight patients, 11 male and 17 female. were selected for this study; The age range was 31 to 56, with an average of 40.2years. Patient selection was based on existence of two bilateral sites presenting similar periodontal involvement, as determined by clinical and radiographic assessment, and requiring comparable bilateral surgical procedures. Using a splitmouth dressing. one site received a periodontal dressing while the other site did not. Pain assessment was made according to a horizontal, rating scale(0-10). After at least a two-week period, the second surgical precedure was performed using the alternate postoperative treatment. At the conclusion of the trial, a self-administered questionnaire on postoperative experience was administered, and were asked of their preference of either, dressed or undressed. The results were as follows: 1. A similar trend for mean pain and discomfort scores as assessed by patients both dressed and salinetreated procedures was evident during 7-day postsurgical period. 2. Statistical analysis of differences between the dressed side and salinetreated side with respect to pain, discomfort and patient's experiences revealed that both treatment sides behaved similarly at any postoperative day(P>0.05). 3. Considering the patient's preference, on the basis of pain and discomfort experienced, 43% preferred the saline-mouthwash and 32% preferred the dressing, 25% showing no preference for either the dressing or the saline-mouthwash. There is evidence to support the use of a periodontal dressing in retention of an apically positioned flap by preventing coronal displacement, or its use to provide additional support to stabilize a free gingival graft. However, there will always be a use for periodontal dressing although routine use of dressings may decrease because of better surgical techniques and the use of antibacterial mouth rinses.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.21-28
• /
• 2020

Purpose: After periodontal surgery, studies have found that the use of periodontal wound dressing reduces the risk of wound infection and increases healing. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of attachable periodontal wound dressing on the healing and patient satisfaction after periodontal flap surgery. Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight patients requiring periodontal surgery underwent periodontal flap surgery on both quadrants of maxilla or mandible. Postoperative pain, bleeding, dietary discomfort and hypersensitivity in relation to attachable periodontal wound dressing was assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Additional survey on frequency of burning sensation and overall satisfaction rates were assessed. Results: VAS mean values for pain, bleeding, and dietary discomfort depending on the presence and absence of attachable wound dressing were; pain: 2.82, 3.96 (P = 0.002), bleeding: 1.61, 2.54 (P = 0.008), dietary discomfort: 2.82, 4.18 (P < 0.001), respectively. Test groups with attachable wound dressing reported significantly lower rates of discomfort. No significant difference was observed in burning sensation and hypersensitivity related with wound dressing. Satisfaction was higher in 75% of patients who received wound dressing. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, patients who received attachable periodontal wound dressing reported less postoperative pain, bleeding, and dietary discomfort. There was no statistical significance related to the use of wound dressing with burning sensation and hypersensitivity.