Effect of chlorhexidine‐coated dressing on plaque formation after gingivectomy

Bay, Lena M.; Langebaek, J

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0722.1978.tb00631.x

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…O'Neil (1975) reported the varied antimicrobial effect of five different dressings in vitro, and Haugen et al (1977) demonstrated a decrease in antibacterial activity of dressings with time. Bay & Langebaek (1978) showed no enhanced plaque inhibition with chlorhexidine impregnated dressings. In con-trast, Piuss et al (1975), found a dressing impregnated with chlorhexidine reduced bacterial colonisation of the teeth.…”

mentioning

confidence: 88%

Evaluation of the healing response following placement of Coe‐pak and an experimental pack after periodontal flap surgery

Cheshire

Griffiths

et al. 1996

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2 periodontal dressings, Coe-pak and RD8 (a product under development), were assessed following periodontal surgery, using a double-blind study of randomised split-mouth design, with each patient acting as their own control. Matched sites were selected for periodontal flap surgery under local analgesia. Sites were randomly allocated to each group. The dressings were applied by a single operator and both patients and clinical assessors were blind as to the dressing employed. The dressings were assessed as to their handling properties, in addition to a 7-day post-operative assessment of the surgical sites and a subjective patient report. Maximum pain levels were relatively low (4 in a scale 0-10); subjects reported more pain and analgesics required with RD8 than with Coe-pak. This was reflected in the results of the patient assessment which indicated that 50% preferred Coe-pak, compared to 25% who preferred the RD8 dressing. The results showed RD8 to be an acceptable periodontal dressing when compared to Coe-pak. There were no statistically significant differences between treated sites in both groups with regard to post-operative plaque scores, bleeding scores or tissue healing.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 88%

Evaluation of the healing response following placement of Coe‐pak and an experimental pack after periodontal flap surgery

Cheshire

Griffiths

et al. 1996

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the possibility that bacterial plaque may be found between the dressing and the tissue surface also questions the effectiveness of periodontal packs. However, reduction of postoperative pain and facilitation of healing process have been achieved with the incorporation of antiseptics (Ashoe-Jorgensen et al, 1974;Addy and Douglas, 1975;Bay and Langebaek, 1978) and antibacterial agents (Romanow, 1964;Heaney et al, 1972;Breloff and Caffesse, 1983) in periodontal dressings. In addition, chlorhexidine mouthrinse is a widely used adjunct in periodontal therapy due to its antibacterial effects.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of periodontal dressings on fibroblasts and gingival wound healing in dogs

Petelin

Pavlica

Batista

et al. 2004

Acta Veterinaria Hungarica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study the effects of different commercially available periodontal dressings (Peripac, Barricaid, Fittydent, Reso-Pack and Myzotect-tincture) on fibroblast (V-79-379A) proliferation and survival were tested in vitro. Barricaid, Fittydent and Reso-Pack periodontal dressings have only small inhibitory effects on cell proliferation (83.3 ± 9%, 71.6 ± 8.7% and 87.3 ± 4.5% of control after 48 h, respectively) in comparison with the great inhibitory effect of Myzotecttincture (2.9 ± 0.1%) and Peripac (33.7 ± 11.4%) (p < 0.001). Barricaid was the only dressing where 41% of cells survived after exposure, while the other four dressings killed all the cells in 6 days. In addition, the healing of artificially created gingival wounds covered by Barricaid and Reso-Pack was followed for 7 days in 12 Beagle dogs. Histological evaluation of gingival tissue demonstrated that wounds covered by Reso-Pack showed the best epithelisation and vascularity and the least inflammatory reaction in first 4 days. Later the observed parameters were similar with those of wounds covered by Barricaid or without pack. The present results indicate that Peripac periodontal dressing and Myzotect-tincture showed the highest cytotoxicity to fibroblasts in vitro. From the histological observations in Beagle dogs Reso-Pack has been found to be the most suitable dressing, followed by Barricaid.

show abstract

“…Numerous reports have published data regarding the benefits of addition of various chlorhexidine formulations to periodontal dressings (28-29-30-31-32, 34). Clinical trials supporting the use of periodontal dressing are tabulated in Table III.…”

Section: Types Of Periodontal Dressingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

To Pack or Not to Pack: The Current Status of Periodontal Dressings

Jain

Jadhav

2015

Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surgical wound dressings have been employed over several centuries for the purpose of protection of surgical sites, to prevent postoperative infection and to accelerate healing. Periodontal dressings, also known as periodontal packs, provide similar benefits when applied after periodontal surgical procedures. They can broadly be categorized as eugenol-based dressings and noneugenol dressings. Over the years, many modifications have been made to the composition of such dressings to improve their physical and therapeutic properties. Controversies surrounding the rationale for their use, advantages and disadvantages of the most commonly employed periodontal dressings and their current status in clinical practice are described in this comprehensive review. From the evidence-based literature presented here, we have also attempted to answer the question of whether there is a universal need for the application of periodontal dressings.

show abstract

Effect of chlorhexidine‐coated dressing on plaque formation after gingivectomy

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Evaluation of the healing response following placement of Coe‐pak and an experimental pack after periodontal flap surgery

Evaluation of the healing response following placement of Coe‐pak and an experimental pack after periodontal flap surgery

Effects of periodontal dressings on fibroblasts and gingival wound healing in dogs

To Pack or Not to Pack: The Current Status of Periodontal Dressings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About