ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2023
Evaluation of the Hemostatic Effect of an Innovative Tissue Adhesive during Extraction Therapy under Rivaroxaban in a Rodent Model.
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of rivaroxaban on DNA damage in an ischemia-reperfusion model: Evaluation of 8-OHdG levels.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Article
- Applications of Hydrogels in Emergency Therapy.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Hemostasis and Gingival Healing-Polyurethane Adhesive Postextraction Under Rivaroxaban Therapy in a Rodent Model.International journal of dentistry · 2025Article
- Sutureless vascular anastomotic approaches and their potential impacts.Bioactive materials · 2024Review
- Tensile strength of adhesives in peripheral nerve anastomoses: an in vitro biomechanical evaluation of four different neurorrhaphies.European journal of medical research · 2024Article
- A Biodegradable Tissue Adhesive for Post-Extraction Alveolar Bone Regeneration under Ongoing Anticoagulation-A Microstructural Volumetric Analysis in a Rodent Model.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
An increase in rivaroxaban therapies is associated with increased numbers of postoperative bleeding despite the use of hemostatic sponges, which are currently the gold standard treatment. VIVO has shown promising hemostatic results, favorable tissue properties, and ease of application, although it has not yet been used in the oral cavity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hemostatic properties of VIVO in the extraction sockets of 31 rodents and compare this to gelatin sponge (GSP) therapy. At rivaroxaban concentrations of 264.10 ± 250.10 ng/mL, 62 extraction sockets were generated, of which 31 were treated with VIVO and 31 with GSP. The duration time, early and late bleeding events, and wound healing score were determined. Histologic examinations of the tissues were performed after 5 days. VIVO presented a longer procedure, 1.26 ± 0.06 min, but a significantly shorter bleeding time, 0.14 ± 0.03 min. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of the severity and timing of bleeding. More minor early bleeding events were observed for GSP. VIVO showed a significantly better healing score, with favorable histological results. In an animal study, VIVO showed promising hemostatic properties after tooth extraction under ongoing anticoagulative therapy.
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.