Is it possible to extract lower third molars with infiltration anaesthesia techniques using articaine? A double-blind randomized clinical trial

被引:2
|
作者
Figueiredo, Rui [1 ,2 ]
Sofos, Stavros [1 ]
Soriano-Pons, Eduardo [1 ]
Camps-Font, Octavi [1 ,2 ]
Sanmarti-Garcia, Gemma [1 ,2 ]
Gay-Escoda, Cosme [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Valmaseda-Castellon, Eduard [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Barcelona, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Campus Bellvitge,Feixa Llargas S-N,2da Planta, Barcelona 08907, Spain
[2] IDIBELL Inst, Catalonia, Spain
[3] EHFRE Int Univ, Dept Oral Surg & Implantol, Belize, Spain
[4] Teknon Med Ctr, Oral Surg Implantol & Maxillofacial Surg Dept, Barcelona, Spain
关键词
Dental anaesthesia; inferior alveolar nerve block; third molar; postoperative pain; NERVE; LIDOCAINE; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1080/00016357.2020.1760348
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of inferior alveolar nerve blocks (IANB) with additional buccal infiltration (standard technique) and of buccal and lingual anaesthetic infiltration (experimental technique) for lower third molar (L3M) extractions. Study design: A randomised, double-blind clinical trial involving 129 L3M extractions was conducted. In the IANB group, an IANB was performed using the conventional approach, followed by a buccal injection in the extraction area. In the infiltration group (INF), an infiltration was performed in the buccal and lingual areas of the lower second molar. A 4% articaine solution was employed in all cases. The main outcome variable was anaesthetic efficacy. Other variables like intraoperative and postoperative pain, onset time and adverse events were also recorded. Descriptive and bivariate analyses of the data were made. Results: 120 patients were randomised. The IANB group showed significantly higher anaesthetic efficacy than the INF group (64.4 vs. 45.8%) (odds ratio = 0.47; 95% confidence interval = 0.22-0.97; p = 0.042). No complications were observed. Conclusions: IANB with additional buccal infiltration is more suitable than the experimental technique for achieving adequate analgesia in L3M extractions. Moreover, the standard method is safe and provides a shorter onset time and lower initial postoperative pain levels.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 8
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Articaine Infiltration Versus Lidocaine Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block for Primary Mandibular Molars: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
    Garcia, Jorman
    Kratunova, Evelina
    Shah, Amy
    Zhang, Ivan L.
    Marion, Ian
    da Fonseca, Marcio A.
    Han, Michael
    [J]. PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY, 2023, 45 (04) : 299 - 306
  • [2] Efficacy of buccal infiltration anaesthesia with articaine for extraction of mandibular molars: a clinical trial
    Jayasuriya, N. S. S.
    Jayasundara, J. H.
    Pallegama, R. W.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2019, 57 (03): : 296 - 297
  • [3] Efficacy of buccal infiltration anaesthesia with articaine for extraction of mandibular molars: a clinical trial
    Rayati, F.
    Noruziha, A.
    Jabbarian, R.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2018, 56 (07): : 607 - 610
  • [4] Efficacy of Articaine versus Lidocaine in Supplemental Infiltration for Mandibular First versus Second Molars with Irreversible Pulpitis: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Clinical Trial
    Shapiro, Michael R.
    McDonald, Neville J.
    Gardner, Richard
    Peters, Mathilde C.
    Botero, Tatiana M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 2018, 44 (04) : 523 - 528
  • [5] Buffered 2% articaine in buccal infiltration of mandibular molars: a randomized triple-blind clinical trial
    Levano Loayza, Sandro Alexander
    Barbin, Thomas
    Benedicto dos Santos, Victor Augusto
    Groppo, Francisco Carlos
    Amorim, Klinger de Souza
    Fernandes Paiva, Daniel Felipe
    Figueroba, Sidney Raimundo
    [J]. BRAZILIAN ORAL RESEARCH, 2023, 37
  • [6] Spinal anaesthesia with articaine 5% vs bupivacaine 0.5% for day-case lower limb surgery:: a double-blind randomized clinical trial
    Dijkstra, T.
    Reesink, J. A.
    Verdouw, B. C.
    Van der Pol, W. S. C. J. M.
    Feberwee, T.
    Vulto, A. G.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2008, 100 (01) : 104 - 108
  • [7] Effectiveness of Articaine Buccal Infiltration Anesthesia for Mandibular Premolar Extraction: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
    Majid, Omer Waleed
    Muhammad, Zaid Abdulazeez
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2019, 77 (09) : 1784 - 1789
  • [8] Efficacy of Articaine versus Lidocaine as a Supplemental Buccal Infiltration in Mandibular Molars with Irreversible Pulpitis: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Study
    Rogers, Brandon S.
    Botero, Tatiana M.
    McDonald, Neville J.
    Gardner, Richard J.
    Peters, Mathilde C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 2014, 40 (06) : 753 - 758
  • [9] Plain articaine or prilocaine for spinal anaesthesia in day-case knee arthroscopy: a double-blind randomized trial
    Hendriks, M. P.
    de Weert, C. J. M.
    Snoeck, M. M. J.
    Hu, H. P.
    Pluim, M. A. L.
    Gielen, M. J. M.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2009, 102 (02) : 259 - 263
  • [10] Articaine and mepivacaine efficacy in postoperative analgesia for lower third molar removal:: a double-blind, randomized, crossover study
    Colombini, Bella L.
    Modena, Karin C. S.
    Calvo, Adriana M.
    Sakai, Vivien T.
    Giglio, Fernando P. M.
    Dionisio, Thiago J.
    Trindade, Alceu S., Jr.
    Lauris, Jose R. P.
    Santos, Carlos F.
    [J]. ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTOLOGY, 2006, 102 (02): : 169 - 174