Nitrous Oxide/Oxygen Effect on IANB Injection Pain and Mandibular Pulpal Anesthesia in Asymptomatic Subjects

The inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) does not always result in successful pulpal anesthesia. Nitrous oxide may increase the success of the IANB. The purpose of this investigation was to study the effect of nitrous oxide/oxygen (N2O/O2) on IANB injection pain and mandibular pulpal anesthesia in asymptomatic subjects. One hundred five asymptomatic subjects received an IANB after the administration of N2O/O2 or room air/oxygen (air/O2) at 2 separate appointments. After the IANB, subjects rated their level of pain for each phase of the injection (needle insertion, needle placement, and solution deposition) using a Heft Parker visual analog scale. Pulpal anesthesia was evaluated with an electric pulp tester for 60 minutes. The mean pain rating for all 3 injection phases showed a statistically significant reduction in pain when N2O/O2 was used compared with Air/O2 (P < .05). Odds ratios demonstrated a statistically significant increase in IANB success for the N2O/O2 group compared with the air/O2 group. N2O/O2 administration statistically decreased pain for all 3 injection phases of the IANB. In addition, nitrous oxide statistically increased the likelihood of pulpal anesthesia for posterior mandibular teeth. However, the incidence of pulpal anesthesia was not 100%.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of Pulpal Anesthesia Using a Needle-less Syringe

Anesthesia Progress ◽

10.2344/anpr-67-02-11 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 67 (4) ◽

pp. 200-206

Author(s):

Coleman Christensen ◽

Stephen C. Arnason ◽

Ross Oates ◽

Michael Crabtree ◽

John W. Kersey ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽

Contralateral Side ◽

Injection Pain ◽

Injection Technique ◽

Single Tooth ◽

Tooth Type ◽

Vas Scores ◽

The Difference ◽

Mandibular Teeth ◽

Pulpal Anesthesia

The purpose of this study was to investigate the manufacturer's claims regarding a novel needleless intraligamentary local anesthesia injection device (Numbee, BioDent) to provide effective single tooth anesthesia. Investigators compared the Numbee with a traditional inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) during a restorative procedure on mandibular teeth. A randomized, split-mouth design was conducted with 15 adult subjects receiving an IANB on one side and a Numbee injection on the same tooth type on the contralateral side. Subjects recorded injection pain using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and their preferred injection technique. Anesthesia was considered profound with 2 consecutive electric pulp tester readings of 80. If subjects became symptomatic during the restorative procedure, rescue anesthesia was administered. The difference in VAS scores for injection pain between the Numbee and the IANB was not significant (p = .078). For the IANB, the incidence of profound anesthesia was 46%, and required rescue anesthesia was 20%. For the Numbee, the incidence of profound anesthesia was 0%, and required rescue anesthesia was 60%. Subject preference was evenly split (50/50%) between the 2 techniques. The IANB outperformed the Numbee device for achieving profound anesthesia and requiring less rescue anesthesia.

Download Full-text

Comparison of speed of action and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine for pulpal anesthesia in mandibular teeth: A randomized, double-blind cross-over trial

European Journal of Dentistry ◽

10.4103/1305-7456.156811 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 09 (02) ◽

pp. 201-206 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Giath Gazal

Keyword(s):

Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽

T Test ◽

Injection Pain ◽

Double Blind Study ◽

Double Blind ◽

Pain Scores ◽

Molar Teeth ◽

Mandibular Teeth ◽

Pulpal Anesthesia ◽

Mandibular First Molar

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the injection pain and speed of local anesthetic effect induced by tissue infiltration of mepivacaine 2% with epinephrine 1:100,000 versus articaine 4% with epinephrine 1:100,000 in securing mandibular first molar pulp anesthesia. Materials and Methods: Totally, 25 patients were recruited in a crossover, randomized, double-blind study. Each subject received injections of mepivacaine 2% with epinephrine 1:100,000 as inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) supplemented with either articaine 4% with epinephrine 1:100,000 (septocaine) or mepivacaine 2% buccal infiltration (BI) injection on two visits. The time of first numbness to associated lip, tongue and tooth was recorded by asking the participant directly and using electrical pulp tester. Anesthetic success was considered when two consecutive maximal stimulation on pulp testing readings without sensation. The patients rated the pain of infiltration using a 100 mm visual analog scale immediately after receiving each injection. The pain scores were compared using the paired t-test. Results: There were significant differences in the meantime of first numbness to associated lip and tooth of volunteers between mepivacaine and articaine BI groups P = 0.03 and 0.002. Volunteers in articaine group recorded earlier lip and teeth numbness than those in mepivacaine group. There were significant differences between the mean pain scores for volunteers in the post IANB and postbuccal injection groups (t-test: P <0.001). Mepivacaine IANB injection was significantly more painful than articaine/mepivacaine buccal injection. Conclusions: About 4% articaine was faster than 2% mepivacaine (both with 1:100,000 adrenaline) in anesthetizing the pulps of lower molar teeth after BIs. Earlier lip and teeth numbness were recorded in articaine group. Articaine and mepivacaine BIs were more comfortable than mepivacaine IANB injections.

Download Full-text

Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Injection Pain Using a Computer-Controlled Local Anesthetic Device (CCLAD): A Prospective, Randomized Study

Anesthesia Progress ◽

10.2344/anpr-65-03-11 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 65 (4) ◽

pp. 231-236

Author(s):

Sara Fowler ◽

Chase Crowley ◽

Melissa Drum ◽

Al Reader ◽

John Nusstein ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Nerve Block ◽

Local Anesthetic ◽

Supine Position ◽

Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽

Needle Insertion ◽

Injection Pain ◽

Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block ◽

Needle Placement ◽

Solution Deposition ◽

Computer Controlled

There is evidence that the Computer-Controlled Local Anesthetic Device (CCLAD) decreases the pain of oral injections. The purpose of this study was to evaluate injection pain of the inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) using the CCLAD in an upright position versus a supine position. Additionally, we evaluated solution deposition pain with the CCLAD when compared to previous studies using a traditional syringe. One hundred ten asymptomatic subjects were randomly given IANBs using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine while in an upright sitting position and supine position, at 2 different appointments, spaced at least 2 weeks apart. Each subject rated the pain for needle insertion, needle placement, and solution deposition on a Heft-Parker visual analogue scale. Pain ratings were compared between the upright and supine positions using a repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc testing using the Tukey-Kramer procedure. Moderate to severe pain was reported by 10% to 13% of the patients for needle insertion, 74% to 75% for full needle placement, and 8% to 10% for solution deposition. There was no significant difference between groups for phases of the injection. When comparing the injection phases within the groups, the needle placement phase of the injection was statistically more painful than both the needle insertion phase and solution deposition phase (p = .0001). Using the CCLAD, IANB injection pain of the supine and upright positions was not statistically different. Needle placement was the most painful phase of the injection. Solution deposition pain was less with the CCLAD when compared to other studies of the IANB using a traditional syringe.

Download Full-text

Anesthetic Efficacy of a Combination of 0.5 M Mannitol Plus 127.2 mg of Lidocaine With 50 μg Epinephrine in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Blocks: A Prospective Randomized, Single-Blind Study

Anesthesia Progress ◽

10.2344/11-00040.1 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 60 (1) ◽

pp. 3-10 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Steven Smith ◽

Al Reader ◽

Melissa Drum ◽

John Nusstein ◽

Mike Beck

Keyword(s):

Postoperative Pain ◽

Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽

Blind Study ◽

Maximum Output ◽

Nerve Blocks ◽

Posterior Teeth ◽

Solution Deposition ◽

The Times ◽

Pulpal Anesthesia ◽

Single Blind

Abstract The purpose of this prospective, randomized, single-blind study was to determine the anesthetic efficacy of 127.2 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine compared to 127.2 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine plus 0.5 M mannitol in inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) blocks. Forty subjects randomly received 2 IAN blocks consisting of a 3.18 mL formulation of 127.2 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine and a 5 mL formulation of 127.2 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine (3.18 mL) plus 0.5 M mannitol (1.82 mL) in 2 separate appointments spaced at least 1 week apart. Mandibular anterior and posterior teeth were blindly electric pulp tested at 4-minute cycles for 60 minutes postinjection. Pain of solution deposition and postoperative pain were also measured. No response from the subject to the maximum output (80 reading) of the pulp tester was used as the criterion for pulpal anesthesia. Total percent pulpal anesthesia was defined as the total of all the times of pulpal anesthesia (80 readings) over the 60 minutes. One hundred percent of the subjects had profound lip numbness with both inferior alveolar nerve blocks. The results demonstrated that a 5 mL formulation of 127.2 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine plus 0.5 M mannitol was significantly better than the 3.18 mL formulation of 127.2 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine for all teeth. Solution deposition pain and postoperative pain were not statistically different between the lidocaine/mannitol formulation and the lidocaine formulation without mannitol. We concluded that adding 0.5 M mannitol to a lidocaine with epinephrine formulation was significantly more effective in achieving a greater percentage of total pulpal anesthesia than a lidocaine formulation without mannitol.

Download Full-text

Effect of Nitrous Oxide on Pulpal Anesthesia: A Preliminary Study

Anesthesia Progress ◽

10.2344/anpr-65-02-08 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 65 (3) ◽

pp. 156-161

Author(s):

Papimon Chompu-inwai ◽

Sophon Simprasert ◽

Patchanee Chuveera ◽

Areerat Nirunsittirat ◽

Thanapat Sastraruji ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Nitrous Oxide ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Permanent Teeth ◽

Chi Square ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Nitrous Oxide Oxygen ◽

Chi Square Test ◽

Preliminary Study ◽

Pulpal Anesthesia ◽

Irreversible Pulpitis

To compare the success of perceived pulpal anesthesia between groups using nitrous oxide/oxygen (N2O/O2) and oxygen (O2) in children premedicated with ibuprofen with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis permanent teeth. Thirty-three children (mean age 10.4 ± 1.9 years) with 33 symptomatic irreversible pulpitis permanent teeth were included in this preliminary study. All children were premedicated with ibuprofen and randomly assigned to receive either N2O/O2 (17 participants) or O2 (16 participants). Four percent articaine with epinephrine 1:100,000 was administered, and vital pulp therapy was performed. Children used the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale (WBFPS) to report their pain at baseline as well as during carious dentin removal, pulpal exposure, and pulpal tissue removal steps. The success was determined when the reported WBFPS score was ≤4. The chi-square test was used to compare the success between both groups. The success of pulpal anesthesia was 71% (12/17) and 19% (3/16) in the N2O/O2 and O2 groups, respectively. The success in the N2O/O2 group was 52% higher than that in the O2 group (confidence interval = 22.9% to 80.7%; significant difference p = .003). From the result of this preliminary study, N2O/O2 significantly increased the success of perceived pulpal anesthesia in children premedicated with ibuprofen with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis permanent teeth. However, further study with a larger sample is required to confirm this result.

Download Full-text

Anesthetic Efficacy of Combinations of 0.5 M Mannitol and Lidocaine With Epinephrine in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Blocks: A Prospective Randomized, Single-Blind Study

Anesthesia Progress ◽

10.2344/11-30.1 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 58 (4) ◽

pp. 157-165 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Ronald Wolf ◽

Al Reader ◽

Melissa Drum ◽

John Nusstein ◽

Mike Beck

Keyword(s):

Postoperative Pain ◽

Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽

Blind Study ◽

Maximum Output ◽

Nerve Blocks ◽

Solution Deposition ◽

The Times ◽

Pulpal Anesthesia ◽

Single Blind ◽

Better Than

Abstract The purpose of this prospective, randomized, single-blind study was to determine the anesthetic efficacy of lidocaine with epinephrine compared to lidocaine with epinephrine plus 0.5 M mannitol in inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) blocks. Forty subjects randomly received an IAN block in 3 separate appointments spaced at least 1 week apart using the following formulations: a 1.8 mL solution of 36 mg lidocaine with 18 µg epinephrine (control solution); a 2.84 mL solution of 36 mg lidocaine with 18 µg epinephrine (1.80 mL) plus 0.5 M mannitol (1.04 mL); and a 5 mL solution of 63.6 mg lidocaine with 32 µg epinephrine (3.18 mL) plus 0.5 M mannitol (1.82 mL). Mandibular teeth were blindly electric pulp tested at 4-minute cycles for 60 minutes postinjection. No response from the subject to the maximum output (80 reading) of the pulp tester was used as the criterion for pulpal anesthesia. Mean percent total pulpal anesthesia was defined as the total of all the times of pulpal anesthesia (80 readings) over the 60 minutes. Pain of solution deposition and postoperative pain were also measured. The results demonstrated that 2.84 mL of lidocaine with epinephrine plus 0.5 M mannitol was significantly better than 1.8 mL of lidocaine with epinephrine for the molars and premolars. The 5 mL of lidocaine with epinephrine plus 0.5 M mannitol was statistically better than 1.8 mL of lidocaine with epinephrine and 2.84 mL of lidocaine with epinephrine plus 0.5 M mannitol for all teeth except the central incisor. Solution deposition pain and postoperative pain were not statistically different among the mannitol formulations and the lidocaine formulation without mannitol. We concluded that adding 0.5 M mannitol to lidocaine with epinephrine formulations significantly improved effectiveness in achieving a greater percentage of total pulpal anesthesia compared with a lidocaine formulation without mannitol for IAN block.

Download Full-text

Anesthetic Efficacy of a Combination of 0.9 M Mannitol Plus 68.8 mg of Lidocaine With 50 μg Epinephrine in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Blocks: A Prospective Randomized, Single Blind Study

Anesthesia Progress ◽

10.2344/0003-3006-60.4.145 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 60 (4) ◽

pp. 145-152 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Howard Cohen ◽

Al Reader ◽

Melissa Drum ◽

John Nusstein ◽

Mike Beck

Keyword(s):

Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽

Blind Study ◽

Maximum Output ◽

Nerve Blocks ◽

Posterior Teeth ◽

The Subject ◽

Mandibular Teeth ◽

The Times ◽

Pulpal Anesthesia ◽

Single Blind

Abstract The purpose of this prospective randomized, single blind study was to determine the anesthetic efficacy of 68.8 mg of lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine compared to 68.8 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine plus 0.9 M mannitol in inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) blocks. Forty subjects randomly received 2 IAN blocks consisting of a 1.72-mL formulation of 68.8 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine and a 5-mL formulation of 68.8 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine (1.72 mL) plus 0.9 M mannitol (3.28 mL) in 2 separate appointments spaced at least 1 week apart. Mandibular anterior and posterior teeth were blindly electric pulp tested at 4-minute cycles for 60 minutes postinjection. No response from the subject to the maximum output (80 reading) of the pulp tester was used as the criterion for pulpal anesthesia. Total percent pulpal anesthesia was defined as the total of all the times of pulpal anesthesia (80 readings), for each tooth, over the 60 minutes. One hundred percent of the subjects had profound lip numbness with both inferior alveolar nerve blocks. The results demonstrated that the 5 mL-formulation of 68.8 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine plus 0.9 M mannitol was significantly better than the 1.72-mL formulation of 68.8 mg lidocaine with 50 μg epinephrine for all teeth, except the lateral incisor. We concluded that adding 0.9 M mannitol to a lidocaine with epinephrine formulation was significantly more effective in achieving a greater percentage of total pulpal anesthesia (as defined in this study) than a lidocaine formulation without mannitol. However, the 0.9 M mannitol/lidocaine formulation would not provide 100% pulpal anesthesia for all the mandibular teeth.

Download Full-text