Evaluation of the Use of Collagen Hemostatic Membrane and Sponge in the Alveoli: A Prospective Split-Mouth Clinical Study

Background: Bleeding control is considered one of the general foundations of any surgical procedure, including tooth extractions. In this scenario, hemostasis can be achieved using collagen membranes and sponges. Lumina Coat® collagen membrane, made of freeze-dried bovine type-1 collagen, and Hemospon® sponge, made of freeze-dried porcine gelatine, both absorbable, are widely used in dentis-try and have been scientifically proven to help with post-extraction hemostasis. Objective: This prospective split-mouth clinical study aimed to compare and describe the bleeding, soft tissue healing, and pain control after tooth extractions using the Lumina Coat® membrane or the Hemospon® sponge. Methods: Thirty-two alveoli were included in this study. After the extractions, the sockets were filled with two types of material: Hemospon® collagen sponge (control group) and Lumina Coat® collagen membrane (test group). The participants were assessed after 30 minutes, 24, and 48 hours to examine the bleeding and then instructed to return after 7 days for clinical assessment of soft tissue healing and suture removal. The appraisal of the soft tissue healing and bleeding used scores from 0 to 3; pain control was assessed using the VAS pain analog scale. The data obtained was expressed as the mean and standard deviation. The data was analyzed using Prism 9 (GraphPad software). Results: In the more extended postoperative period, the pain scores were lower in both groups. The initial scores for the Lumina Coat group were 2.20, while the Hemospon group had an average score of 2.80. At 7 days, both groups had an average score of 0.25 (p>0.05). The bleeding scores were higher in both groups in the early postoperative periods; Lumina Coat group had an average bleeding score of 1.35, whereas the Hemospon group had an average score of 1.65, and went through a reduction until the 24 hours, evolving to complete cessation of bleeding after this period. There was a statistically significant difference between the Lumina Coat group (average 0.75) and Hemospon (average 1.20) at 30 minutes post-operatively, where a significant decrease in the bleeding score was observed in the Lumina Coat group. Both groups' healing scores were higher in the initial postoperative period, reducing after 7 days. There was a statistically significant difference between the Lumina Coat group (average 0.35) and Hemospon (average 0.80) at 2 days post-operatively, where a significant decrease in the healing score was observed in the Lumina Coat group. Conclusion: Both materials were effective for controlling pain, bleeding, and providing soft tissue healing. However, the Lumina Coat group had positive results compared to Hemospon in reducing bleeding and healing scores.