Bleeding control measures during oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures: A systematic review

Surgical bleeding can be associated with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality across all surgical areas. Thus, to avoid complications related to excessive bleeding, numerous products have been developed to achieve hemostasis. The thorough knowledge of these hemostatic measures is required for good results. The aim of the study is to compare the different methods to control bleeding in oral and maxillofacial surgery. An extensive systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Google search using combination of keywords such as bleeding, bleeding control methods, oral surgery, Gelfoam, vasoconstrictors, Chitosan, Floseal, haemcoagulase, Gelatin Sponge, Suturing, and Cautery. The inclusion criteria for the study were articles in English, articles published between January 1, 1990 to June 30, 2016, studies that provide information about bleeding control procedures, complications during head, neck, and face surgery procedures and hemostatic agent and articles based on observational studies and original articles. Exclusion criteria for the study were studies that provided inadequate information, systemic review, research papers, case reports, letters to editor and studies based on animals other than human beings. Total 11 articles were selected for the analysis which included head, face, and neck procedures with/without using bleeding control measures such as pressure application, suturing, cautery, ligation of blood vessel, application of Ankaferd blood stopper, chitosan, Floseal®, thrombin–gelatin matrix (Tissel®)/fibrin glue, Gelfoam, and tranexamic acid. Conventional methods are insufficient to control extensive bleeding. However, newer methods or combinations of these methods are required to achieve adequate hemostasis. All hemostatic measures were not covered in this review