ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 65-71

Gingival tissue response following placement of a light cure dressing and a non-eugenol dressing after periodontal flap procedure: A comparative clinical study


1 Department of Periodontics, Maulana Azad Institute of Dental Sciences, New Delhi, India
2 Department of Periodontics, Dr. Ziauddin Ahmad Dental College and Hospital, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Abdul Ahad
Department of Periodontics, Dr. Ziauddin Ahmad Dental College and Hospital, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh - 202 002, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jnsbm.JNSBM_75_17

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The aim was to compare the gingival tissue response following placement of a light cure dressing (Barricaid®) and a non-eugenol periodontal dressing (Coe-Pak) after periodontal flap procedure. This was carried out by evaluating plaque deposition underneath both the dressings, healing response and the patient preference for each. Materials and Methods: A total of 12 patients with chronic generalized periodontitis requiring surgery in at least two different quadrants were enrolled for this split-mouth study. After periodontal flap surgery, Coe-Pak was placed in the quadrant assigned to Group I and Barricaid® was placed in the other quadrant assigned to Group II. Clinical parameters were recorded on day 7 and day 14. Patient comfort and pain levels were also evaluated by a questionnaire. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in wound healing and the clinical gingival parameters between two groups. The only significant difference was found in the plaque attached underneath the dressing, with Coe-Pak showing greater plaque accumulation than Barricaid®. Seventy five (75) % of the patients preferred Barricaid® over Coe-Pak, based on its appearance and taste. Conclusion: The non-eugenol dressing seemed to retain more plaque on its undersurface than light-cure dressing. However, this did not have much influence on the healing outcome and clinical gingival parameters, which were optimal and comparable in both groups. The greater number of patients showed a preference for light cure dressing, based on its superior esthetics and taste.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3254    
    Printed70    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded539    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal