Influence of Hemostatic Agents in the Prognosis of Periapical Surgery: A Randomized Study of Epinephrine versus Aluminum Chloride

Introduction Several variables have been associated with a better prognosis of periapical surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of 2 hemostatic agents on the prognosis of periapical surgery at 12 months. Methods A prospective study was designed with 2 randomized parallel groups established depending on the hemostatic agent used: epinephrine or aluminum chloride. The analysis of the hemorrhage control was recorded as 0 (no hemorrhage control), 1 (slight but apparent intermittent bleeding persisted after application of the material), or 2 (complete hemorrhage control). At 12 months, periapical lesion healing was determined clinically and radiologically as success, improvement, or failure. Results Ninety-five patients (67 women and 28 men) with periapical lesions involving a single tooth were enrolled in this study; in 45 teeth, epinephrine was used and in 50 teeth aluminum chloride. In the epinephrine group, 28 teeth were classified as successes, 10 as improvements, and 7 as failures. In the aluminum chloride group, 34 teeth were classified as successes, 11 as improvements, and 5 as failures. No statistically significant difference was found. Conclusions The present study found no association between the use of epinephrine or aluminum chloride as hemostatic agents on the prognosis of periapical surgery. The efficacy of hemostatic agents at the time of surgery showed no relationship with the healing outcome.