scholarly journals A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of 2% Lidocaine With 1 : 100,000 Epinephrine, 4% Prilocaine With 1 : 200,000 Epinephrine, and 4% Prilocaine for Maxillary Infiltrations

2010 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Katz ◽  
Melissa Drum ◽  
Al Reader ◽  
John Nusstein ◽  
Mike Beck

Abstract The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind crossover study was to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine, 4% prilocaine with 1 : 200,000 epinephrine, and 4% prilocaine in maxillary lateral incisors and first molars. Sixty subjects randomly received, in a double-blind manner, maxillary lateral incisor and first molar infiltrations of 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine, 1.8 mL of 4% prilocaine with 1 : 200,000 epinephrine, and 1.8 mL of 4% prilocaine, at 3 separate appointments spaced at least 1 week apart. The teeth were pulp-tested in 3-minute cycles for a total of 60 minutes. Anesthetic success (ie, obtaining 2 consecutive 80 readings with the electric pulp tester) and onset of pulpal anesthesia were not significantly different between 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine, 4% prilocaine with 1 : 200,000 epinephrine, and 4% prilocaine for the lateral incisor and first molar. For both lateral incisor and first molar, 4% prilocaine with 1 : 200,000 epinephrine and 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine were equivalent for incidence of pulpal anesthesia. However, neither anesthetic agent provided an hour of pulpal anesthesia. For both lateral incisor and first molar, 4% prilocaine provided a significantly shorter duration of pulpal anesthesia compared with 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine and 4% prilocaine with 1 : 200,000 epinephrine.

2010 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 139-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid Lawaty ◽  
Melissa Drum ◽  
Al Reader ◽  
John Nusstein

Abstract The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind crossover study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 2% mepivacaine with 1 : 20,000 levonordefrin versus 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine in maxillary central incisors and first molars. Sixty subjects randomly received, in a double-blind manner, maxillary central incisor and first molar infiltrations of 1.8 mL of 2% mepivacaine with 1 : 20,000 levonordefrin and 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine at 2 separate appointments spaced at least 1 week apart. The teeth were electric pulp tested in 2-minute cycles for a total of 60 minutes. Anesthetic success (obtaining 2 consecutive 80 readings with the electric pulp tester within 10 minutes) was not significantly different between 2% mepivacaine with 1 : 20,000 levonordefrin and 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine for the central incisor and first molar. However, neither anesthetic agent provided an hour of pulpal anesthesia.


1979 ◽  
Vol 42 (02) ◽  
pp. 621-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
G G Nenci ◽  
G Agnelli ◽  
M Berrettini ◽  
P Parise ◽  
E Ballatori

SummaryIn a randomized double-blind crossover study in 16 patients with enhanced in vitro spontaneous platelet aggregation, sulfinpyrazone proved to be effective in normalizing platelet aggregability within 4 days after initiation of therapy.


Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 696
Author(s):  
Neus Bosch-Sierra ◽  
Roger Marqués-Cardete ◽  
Aránzazu Gurrea-Martínez ◽  
Carmen Grau-Del Valle ◽  
Clara Talens ◽  
...  

The authors have requested that the following changes be made to their paper [...]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document