Effectiveness of Hemostatic Sponges (HEMOSPONGE and GELATAMP) Following Dental Extractions in Patients Attending the Dr. René Puig Bentz Dental Clinic

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the hemostatic sponges Gelatamp and Hemosponge in the postoperative management of dental extractions, compared with no hemostatic material, in patients treated at the Dr. René Puig Bentz Dental Clinic. The hypothesis proposed that the use of Gelatamp would provide better postoperative outcomes compared to Hemosponge in terms of pain, healing, and prevalence of complications. A comparative study was conducted with a sample of 90 patients, equally distributed into three groups: Gelatamp group, Hemosponge group, and a control group without hemostatic material. Patients underwent simple extractions and flap extractions, following strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were collected using digital clinical records, assessing postoperative pain through a visual analog scale, healing level using the modified Landry, Turnbull and Howley index, and the presence of complications such as alveolitis, trismus, inflammation, suppuration, and bleeding. The evaluation was performed on the seventh postoperative day by a calibrated examiner. The results showed low and similar pain levels across the three groups, with no significant differences between patients treated with Gelatamp, Hemosponge, or those without hemostatic material. Healing scores were high in all groups, indicating adequate tissue regeneration regardless of the material used. The prevalence of postoperative complications was minimal, with a low incidence of adverse events such as dry socket, inflammation, and trismus. No clinically relevant differences were identified between Gelatamp and Hemosponge regarding healing, pain control, or the occurrence of complications. In conclusion, the data indicate that both Gelatamp and Hemosponge demonstrate comparable clinical effectiveness to each other and similar outcomes to management without hemostatic sponges in patients with stable systemic conditions. No significant superiority of one material over the other was demonstrated during the evaluated postoperative phase. However, their ability to promote hemostasis and stabilize the blood clot suggests that they may be useful tools in patients with a higher risk of bleeding or in specific clinical situations requiring additional hemostatic control