ArticleCureus2023
The Optimal Hemostasis Duration After Tooth Extraction: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06687824 (Evaluation of the Effect of Black Tea Extract-Impregnated Gauze on Primary Bleeding Cessation After Molar Extraction), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Evaluation of the Effect of Black Tea Extract-Impregnated Gauze on Primary Bleeding Cessation After Molar Extraction: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Graphene-Based 3D Scaffolds in Bone Regeneration: Emerging Opportunities for MRONJ Treatment.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Blue Light Therapy for Achieving Hemostasis and Accelerated Wound Healing Post Extraction: A Randomized Control Trial.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background There is a lack of evidence-based practice regarding the duration of pressure pack placement following tooth extraction. This study aimed to compare the incidence of post-extraction bleeding following 60 minutes versus 10 minutes of pressure pack placement. Methodology A randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary care hospital and included patients requiring intra-alveolar tooth extractions. Patients were randomly allocated into the experimental group or control group by a permuted block randomization method. A blinded observer noted the incidence of post-extraction bleeding. Categorical variables were summarized as frequency and percentage. The chi-square test was used for intergroup statistical analysis. P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results There were 528 participants, 264 of whom were allocated to each group. The incidence of post-extraction bleeding was 8% and 6.8% in the experimental and control groups, respectively. On bivariate analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.618; relative risk with 95% confidence interval = 1.0). Conclusions In the majority of cases, hemostasis was achieved in 10 minutes. Therefore, removing the pressure pack after 10 minutes may be advised to ensure hemostasis and, ultimately, save chairside time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.