Search

Aim: The purpose of the present research was to evaluate the intermaxillary fixation techniques in maxillofacial trauma surgery in terms of cross infection control. Methodology: A randomized controlled trial which included 120 patients with fractures of the mandible requiring open reduction and fixation. The participants were allocated either to the study group and treated with intraoperative Rapid IMF or to the control group and managed with intraoperative eyelet wire ties. Results: Rapid IMF group had significantly fewer glove perforations than the traditional method (0.67 per operation compared with 1.5), (P < 0.0001). The incidence of skin-penetrating injuries was the same in both groups (rate 0.02/ procedure). The application of Rapid IMF was significantly faster than wiring (P < 0.0001). Minor intraoperative complications were noted in both groups, but more in the Rapid IMF group. Most concerned loosening or fracture of the anchorage ties but the surgical outcome was not affected. Conclusion: Rapid IMF is a safer alternative to wiring methods with significant reduction in glove perforation rates and is quicker to apply than conventional wiring techniques.

Anti-asthmatic medication makes the oral habitat susceptible to opportunistic infections like

Aims and Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of chitosan-based dressing after extraction in individuals on antithrombotics, without modification of their treatment schedule. Materials and Methods: A randomized comparative study was carried out on 40 subjects who had two extraction sites, in dissimilar quadrants. The surgical site was chosen at random and post-extraction hemostasis was achieved by a custom-cut chitosan dressing (study site) and sterile cotton gauze dressing (suturing if required) at control site. Patients were reviewed on the first, third, fifth, and seventh postoperative days and every week till 4 weeks. The parameters assessed were timing of hemostasis, pain scores, and pus discharge. Results: Out of 40 study subjects, 24 (60%) were males and 16 (40%) were females. The age was 40–65 years (mean age 54 years). The mean time for hemostasis was 0.63 ± 0.27 min in study group, whereas for controls, it was 9.10 ± 2.28 min. The difference in postoperative pain was significant (P = 0.001) on days one, five, and seven. In chitosan group extraction sites, dry socket was not seen, whereas four patients on day three and five patients on day five after extraction experienced dry socket in pressure gauze dressings group, with an insignificant difference (P = 0.058). In chitosan group extraction sites, no pus discharge was seen. Whereas four patients on days three and five after extraction had pus discharge in patients where pressure dressings were applied, with an insignificant difference (P = 0.058). Conclusion: Chitosan dressing is a competent hemostatic agent that significantly reduced the post-extraction bleeding, with better pain control. Chitosan group had no incidences of dry socket and pus discharge.