Comparative Assessment of Efficacy of “BLUEM” Active Oxygen Gel and COE‑PAK Dressing on Postoperative Healing After Surgical Depigmentation - A Split Mouth Study

Sep 30, 2026

Uploaded by jayni

Dark-colored gingiva compromises smile esthetics and is addressed through periodontal plastic surgical depigmentation. This split-mouth randomized clinical trial evaluated BlueM active oxygen gel versus COE‑PAK dressing after scalpel-based surgical depigmentation in 20 patients (40 treated sites) across Dummett–Gupta Oral Pigmentation Index classes II–IV. Healing and re‑epithelization were assessed using toluidine blue over one month, comparing pain and recovery outcomes. BlueM showed lower pain and higher re‑epithelization scores than COE‑PAK with statistical significance, supporting BlueM as a better postoperative dressing option.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryHealthcare

FormatPDF

Pages3

Reading Time8 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Background of gingival pigmentation and depigmentation

Surgical techniques and need for periodontal dressings

Materials and Methods

Study design and participant selection

Randomization and intervention

Outcome measures and follow-up

Results

Pain and re-epithelization outcomes

Conclusion

Original Research Comparative Assessment of Efficacy of “BLUEM” Active Oxygen Gel and COE‑PAK Dressing on Postoperative Healing After Surgical Depigmentation—A Split Mouth Study Jaishree Garg1, Somya Tiwari1, Saurabh Sinha2, Tamim Ahmad1, Indrani Bharadwaj1, Radhika Singh1 1Department of Periodontology, Institute of Dental Sciences, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India, 2Department of Dentistry, KMC Medical College, Mahrajganj, Uttar Pradesh, India Submitted: 04‑Aug‑2025 Revised: 10‑Aug‑2025 Accepted: 19‑Aug‑2025 Published: 17‑Dec‑2025 Abstract Introduction: Dark‑colored gingiva is an esthetic concern that cannot be ignored, especially when accompanied by a high lip line or gummy smile. Gingival depigmentation is a periodontal plastic surgical procedure, wherein the hyperpigmentation is removed or reduced by various techniques. Materials and Methods: This split‑mouth randomized clinical trial was conducted on 20 patients aged between 18 and 45 years with maxillary physiological gingival pigmentation classes (II), (III), and (IV) according to the Dummett–Gupta Oral Pigmentation Index (40 treated sites) . The maxilla was randomly divided into two symmetrical parts—from the right second premolar to the midline and from the midline to the left second premolar—to receive either BlueM gel or COE‑PAK as a dressing after surgical depigmentation with a scalpel. Indices assessed were healing index and re‑epithelization index with toluidine blue, and the follow‑up period was one month. Results: The result of the study demonstrated that pain score andre‑epithelization score were less in the test group (BlueM gel) as compared to the control group (COE‑PAK) and was statistically significant. Conclusion: It can be concluded that BlueM gel can also be a better alternative as a periodontal dressing compared to COE‑PAK due to its properties of better healing and decreasing postoperative pain. Keywords: BlueM gel, gingival depigmentation, periodontal dressing Introduction Gingival health and appearance are essential for an aesthetically pleasing smile, and the presence of pigmented gingiva can detract from one’s overall facial esthetics, often leading individuals to seek cosmetic correction.[1] Gingival hyperpigmentation, commonly referred to as physiological or racial pigmentation, is a benign condition frequently observed in individuals with darker skin types and is influenced by genetic traits.[2] The pigmentation arises due to endogenous pigments, such as melanin, melanoid, carotene, and hemoglobin derivatives, with melanin produced by melanoblasts being the primary contributor. External factors, including habits like tobacco smoking, can exacerbate gingival pigmentation.[3] To address such concerns, gingival depigmentation is performed as a periodontal plastic surgical procedure | Access this article online | | | --- | --- | | Quick Response Code:
| Website: [https://journals.lww.com/jpbs](https://journals.lww.com/jpbs) | | | DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1367_25 | aimed at improving smile esthetics.[4] Various techniques have been developed for this purpose, such as gingivectomy, gingivectomy with free gingival grafts, electrosurgery, cryosurgery, application of chemical agents (e.g. phenol and alcohol), mechanical abrasion using diamond burs, and laser‑based treatments including Nd: YAG, semiconductor diode, and CO₂ lasers.[5] Despite the availability of modern tools, the scalpel technique remains widely preferred for its simplicity, cost‑effectiveness, and feasibility under local anesthesia. | Address for correspondence: Dr. Somya Tiwari, Department of Periodontology, Institute of Dental Sciences, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India.
E-mail: [somyatiwari707@gmail.com](somyatiwari707@gmail.com) | | --- | | This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License (CC BY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provi

FAQs

What was compared in this split-mouth study?

The study compared BlueM active oxygen gel versus COE‑PAK dressing as periodontal dressings after scalpel-based surgical depigmentation.

How long were patients followed, and what outcomes were measured?

Patients were followed for one month, with healing index and re‑epithelization index assessed using toluidine blue.

What were the main findings regarding pain and re‑epithelization?

Pain score and re‑epithelization score were better in the test group using BlueM gel compared with the COE‑PAK control group, and the differences were statistically significant.

Why are periodontal dressings needed after scalpel-based depigmentation?

Scalpel depigmentation exposes a raw wound that heals by secondary intention, so dressings protect the site, reduce discomfort, and help prevent infection while supporting proper healing.

Sep 30, 2026

Uploaded by jayni