Letter to editor: Re: Vishal G., Dandriyal N., Indra N, Singh H.P., Chaurasia A. Comparative study of the anaesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine with adrenaline during extraction of mandibular molars using an inferior alveolar nerve blocking technique

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Crofts ◽  
John Williams ◽  
Kenneth Corsar
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽  
Mandibular Molars

A comparative study on effectiveness of mucosal vibration and topical anaesthetic gel in reducing pain during administration of local anaesthetic in paediatric patients.

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 32-41
Author(s):  
Nameeda K S ◽  
Fathimath Nihala K ◽  
Anagha Saseendran ◽  
Priya Nagar ◽  
Pallavi Urs
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Local Anaesthetic ◽  
Pain Perception ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽  
Control Group ◽  
P Value ◽  
Topical Anaesthetic ◽  
Paediatric Patients ◽  
Group I

Title : A comparative study on effectiveness of mucosal vibration and topical anaesthetic gel in reducing pain during administration of local anaesthetic in paediatric patients. Introduction: Anxiety related to dentistryis not uncommon in paediatric patients. Poor pain control alongside the fear and anxiety might interfere with appropriate dental management. In this study a modified mucosal vibration device is used to modify the pain perception during LA administration. Aim: To compare the effectiveness of topical anaesthetic gel and mucosal vibration during local anaestheticadministration in children in the age group8-11 years using both subjective and objective scalescales for measuring anxiety and pain. Methodology: Thirty children who required inferior alveolar nerve blockanaesthesia for routine dental procedures were included and divided equally into 3 groups Group I- control Group II- topical anaesthetic gel Group III - Mucosal vibrator Pain perception was compared, assessed and analysed during injection using Sound, Eye, Motor (SEM) scale, Doremon cartoon modified Wong Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale, MotuPatlu cartoon modified Venham scale Results: The scores of SEM scale and Doremon pain scale when subjected to statistical analysis gave a p value <0.001. Conclusion: Mucosal vibrator is an easily availablehandyand effective chair sidedevice for pain reduction during administration of local anaesthesia for paediatric patients

scholarly journals Anesthetic Efficacy in Irreversible Pulpitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos E. Allegretti ◽  
Roberta M. Sampaio ◽  
Anna C. R. T. Horliana ◽  
Paschoal L. Armonia ◽  
Rodney G. Rocha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Nerve Block ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Mandibular Molars ◽  
School Of Dentistry ◽  
Mandibular Posterior Teeth ◽  
Pulpal Anesthesia ◽  
Irreversible Pulpitis

Abstract Inferior alveolar nerve block has a high failure rate in the treatment of mandibular posterior teeth with irreversible pulpitis. The aim of this study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine, 2% lidocaine and 2% mepivacaine, all in combination with 1:100,000 epinephrine, in patients with irreversible pulpitis of permanent mandibular molars during a pulpectomy procedure. Sixty-six volunteers from the Emergency Center of the School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, randomly received 3.6 mL of local anesthetic as a conventional inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB). The subjective signal of lip numbness, pulpal anesthesia and absence of pain during the pulpectomy procedure were evaluated respectively, by questioning the patient, stimulation using an electric pulp tester and a verbal analogue scale. All patients reported the subjective signal of lip numbness. Regarding pulpal anesthesia success as measured with the pulp tester, the success rate was respectively 68.2% for mepivacaine, 63.6% for articaine and 63.6% for lidocaine. Regarding patients who reported no pain or mild pain during the pulpectomy, the success rate was, respectively 72.7% for mepivacaine, 63.6% for articaine and 54.5% for lidocaine. These differences were not statistically significant. Neither of the solutions resulted in 100% anesthetic success in patients with irreversible pulpitis of mandibular molars.

scholarly journals Is Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Sufficient for Routine Dental Treatment in 4- to 6-year-old Children?

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milad Ghanizadeh ◽  
Maryam Pourkazemi ◽  
Sanaz Sheykhgermchi
Keyword(s):  
Nerve Block ◽  
Buccal Mucosa ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Dental Treatment ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽  
Third Molar ◽  
Primary Molars ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block ◽  
Mandibular Molars ◽  
Lower Canine

ABSTRACT Introduction Pain control is one of the most important aspects of behavior management in children. The most common way to achieve pain control is by using local anesthetics (LA). Many studies describe that the buccal nerve innervates the buccal gingiva and mucosa of the mandible for a variable extent from the vicinity of the lower third molar to the lower canine. Regarding the importance of appropriate and complete LA in child-behavior control, in this study, we examined the frequency of buccal gingiva anesthesia of primary mandibular molars and canine after inferior alveolar nerve block injection in 4- to 6-year-old children. Study design In this descriptive cross-sectional study, 220 4- to 6-year-old children were randomly selected and entered into the study. Inferior alveolar nerve block was injected with the same method and standards for all children, and after ensuring the success of block injection, anesthesia of buccal mucosa of primary molars and canine was examined by stick test and reaction of child using sound, eye, motor (SEM) scale. The data from the study were analyzed using descriptive statistics and statistical software Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21. Results The area that was the highest nonanesthetized was recorded as in the distobuccal of the second primary molars. The area of the lowest nonanesthesia was also reported in the gingiva of primary canine tooth. Conclusion According to this study, in 15 to 30% of cases, after inferior alveolar nerve block injection, the primary mandibular molars' buccal mucosa is not anesthetized. How to cite this article Pourkazemi M, Erfanparast L, Sheykhgermchi S, Ghanizadeh M. Is Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Sufficient for Routine Dental Treatment in 4- to 6-year-old Children? Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2017;10(4):369-372.

Effects of Two Different Anesthetic Solutions on Injection Pain, Efficacy, and Duration of Soft-Tissue Anesthesia with Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block for Primary Molars

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 456-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ülkü Şermet Elbay ◽  
Mesut Elbay ◽  
Emine Kaya ◽  
Sinem Yıldırım
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Nerve Block ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽  
Injection Pain ◽  
Primary Tooth ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Mandibular Molars ◽  
Pain Duration

Objectives: The purpose of the study was to compare the efficacy, injection pain, duration of soft tissue anesthesia, and postoperative complications of two different anesthetics (2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine and 3% plain mepivacaine) in pediatric patients in inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) administered by a computer-controlled delivery system (CCDS). Study Design: The study was conducted as a randomized, controlled-crossover, double-blind clinical trial with 60 children requiring bilateral pulpotomy or extraction of primary mandibular molars. A CCDS was used to deliver 3% mepivacaine to 1 primary tooth and 2% lidocaine to the contralateral tooth with an IANB technique. Severity of pain and efficacy of anesthesia were evaluated using the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability Scale, and comfort and side effects were assessed using a questionnaire. Data were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U, Wilcoxon t, and Fisher exact tests. Results: Patients receiving 2% lidocaine experienced significantly less pain during injection than those receiving 3% mepivacaine, and no significant differences were found in the pain scores during treatments or in postoperative complications between the two anesthetics. The mean durations of anesthesia for 3% mepivacaine and 2% lidocaine were 139.68 minutes and 149.10 minutes, respectively. Conclusions: Plain mepivacaine and 2% lidocaine were similarly effective in pulpotomy and the extraction of primary mandibular molars. Although the use of 3% mepivacaine provided a shorter duration of anesthesia than 2% lidocaine, both solutions showed similar results in terms of postoperative complications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document