• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.4
• /
• pp.269-282
• /
• 2021

This review aimed to assess and compare the outcomes of the anesthetic efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) and Gow-Gates mandibular nerve block (GGMNB) in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. A descriptive systematic review of quantitative research was conducted wherein the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA)" was adopted, and the Problem/Patient/Population, Intervention/Indicator, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) criteria were used to structure the research question. A literature search was performed using PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Ovid. Selection criteria were applied for populations over nine years of age, of either sex, with irreversible pulpitis, and articles published in English regarding conventional IANB or IANB and Gow-Gates techniques between 2009 and 2019. Prospective randomized clinical trials or randomized controlled trials were included in the review, in which anesthetic efficacy or success was measured. After screening, four articles were included. Three studies were randomized clinical trials, and two were randomized controlled trials. The validity and reliability of the individual studies were examined. There was evidence of the higher efficacy of the GGMNB technique than that of the IANB technique. However, both techniques can be mastered through training.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.11-21
• /
• 2015

Background: Epidural injections are performed utilizing 3 approaches in the lumbar spine: caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal. The literature on the efficacy of epidural injections has been sporadic. There are few high-quality randomized trials performed under fluoroscopy in managing disc herniation that have a long-term follow-up and appropriate outcome parameters. There is also a lack of literature comparing the efficacy of these 3 approaches. Methods: This manuscript analyzes data from 3 randomized controlled trials that assessed a total of 360 patients with lumbar disc herniation. There were 120 patients per trial either receiving local anesthetic alone (60 patients) or local anesthetic with steroids (60 patients). Results: Analysis showed similar efficacy for caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal approaches in managing chronic pain and disability from disc herniation. The analysis of caudal epidural injections showed the potential superiority of steroids compared with local anesthetic alone a 2-year follow-up, based on the average relief per procedure. In the interlaminar group, results were somewhat superior for pain relief in the steroid group at 6 months and functional status at 12 months. Interlaminar epidurals provided improvement in a significantly higher proportion of patients. The proportion of patients nonresponsive to initial injections was also lower in the group for local anesthetic with steroid in the interlaminar trial. Conclusions: The results of this assessment show significant improvement in patients suffering from chronic lumbar disc herniation with 3 lumbar epidural approaches with local anesthetic alone, or using steroids with long-term follow-up of up to 2 years, in a contemporary interventional pain management setting.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.147-154
• /
• 2020

Background: Single inferior alveolar nerve block is ineffective in achieving adequate pulpal anesthesia in 30-80% of patients due to anatomical variations, local tissue pH, central sensitization, and several factors. Various supplementary techniques and combination of adjuvants with lignocaine are used to overcome these failures. Magnesium sulfate (MgSO₄), one such adjuvant, acts at the N-methyl-D-aspartate glutamate receptor resulting in effective anesthesia. The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind, clinical controlled trial was to evaluate the onset, anesthetic efficacy, duration and post-operative analgesia of 2% lignocaine with and without the addition of MgSO₄ in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and apical periodontitis. Methods: Fourty-two patients were randomly divided into three groups: 2% lignocaine (group 1) and 2% lignocaine with MgSO₄ (75 mg) and (150 mg) in groups 2 and 3, respectively. Pre-operative vitals and Heft Parker-Visual Analogue Scale (HP-VAS) pain scores were recorded. The onset of anesthesia, anesthetic efficacy, and duration of anesthesia were evaluated post administration of the local anesthetic solution. The post-operative analgesia was examined at intervals of 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h. Results: Administration of 150 mg MgSO₄ hastens the onset of anesthesia (1.29 min) and produces better anesthetic efficacy (3.29 HP-VAS) compared to group 2 (2.07 min and 9.14 HP-VAS) and group 1 (3.29 min and 35.79 HP-VAS), respectively. The duration of anesthesia was significantly higher in group 3 (247.07 min) compared to that of groups 2 and 1 (190 min and 110.21 min) with P < 0.05. Conclusion: Combining 75 mg or 150 mg of MgSO₄ with lignocaine is more effective than 2% lignocaine and 75 mg of MgSO₄ is adequate for endodontic procedures.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.69-76
• /
• 2015

Background: There have been few studies on the effect of an elevated concentration of lidocaine hydrochloride in the surgical removal of an impacted lower third molar. This study aimed to examine the efficacy of 4% lidocaine along with 1:100,000 epinephrine compared to 2% lidocaine along with 1:100,000 epinephrine as inferior alveolar nerve block for the removal of an impacted lower third molar. Methods: This single-blind study involved 31 healthy patients (mean age: 23 y; range: 19-33 y) with symmetrically impacted lower third molars as observed on panoramic radiographs. Volunteers required 2 surgical interventions by the same surgeon with a 3-week washout period. The volunteers were assigned either 4% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine as local anesthetic during each operation. Results: We recorded the time of administration, need for additional anesthetic administration, total volume of anesthetic used. We found that the patient's preference for either of the 2 types of local anesthetic were significantly different (P < 0.05). However, the extent of pulpal anesthesia, surgical duration, and duration of soft tissue anesthesia were not significantly different. Conclusions: Our study suggested that inferior alveolar nerve block using 4% lidocaine HCl with 1:100,000 epinephrine as a local anesthetic was clinically more effective than that using 2% lidocaine HCl with 1:100,000 epinephrine; the surgical duration was not affected, and no clinically adverse effects were encountered.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.143-149
• /
• 2018

Background: We evaluated the changes in mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR), and the anesthetic and hemostatic effects, after injection of 2% lidocaine containing various concentrations of epinephrine in rats and mice to determine the appropriate concentration of epinephrine in various anesthetic mixtures. Methods: Rats and mice were randomly allocated to experimental groups: 2% lidocaine without epinephrine (L0), 2% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:200,000 (L200), 1:100,000 (L100), and 1:80,000 (L80). Changes in MAP and HR after administration of the anesthetic mixture were evaluated using a physiological recording system in rats. Onset and duration of local anesthesia was evaluated by pricking the hind paw of mice. A spectrophotometric hemoglobin assay was used to quantify the hemostatic effect. Results: MAP increased in response to epinephrine in a dose-dependent manner; it was significantly higher in the L80 group than in the L0 group at 5 min post-administration. The HR was relatively lower in the L0 group than in the L80 group. The time required for onset of action was < 1 min in all evaluation groups. The duration of action and hemostatic effect of the local anesthetic were significantly better in the L200, L100, and L80 groups than in the L0 group. Conclusion: L200 demonstrated relatively stable MAP and HR values with satisfactory efficacy and hemostatic effect. L200 might be a better local anesthetic for dental patients in terms of anesthetic efficacy and safety.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.41-46
• /
• 2018

Background: The purpose of this prospective randomized single-blind clinical trial was to evaluate the effect of tilting the head on the anesthetic efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. Methods: Ninety-two patients were divided into two groups: the first group received IANB and the head was tilted in the direction of the block for 15 min, whereas the second group received IANB and the head was tilted to the opposite side. Access cavity preparation was initiated after 15 min. Success was defined as no pain or faint/weak/mild pain during endodontic access preparation and instrumentation. The anesthetic success rates were analyzed by Pearson chi-square test at 5% significance levels. Results: The same side position and opposite side position yielded 41% and 30% anesthetic success rates, respectively; there was no significant difference between the two sides. Conclusions: Relative head position has no effect on the anesthetic success rate of IANB.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.29-37
• /
• 2020

Background: This study evaluated the efficacy of three intraoral topical anesthetics in reducing the injection needle prick pain from local anesthetic among children aged 7-11 years old. Methods: It is a prospective, Interventional, parallel design, single-blind, randomized clinical trial in which subjects (n=90) aged 7-11 years were included in the study based on an inclusion criteria. Subjects were divided into three groups based on computer-generated randomization with an allocation ratio of 1:1:1. Groups A, B, and C received benzocaine 20% jelly (Mucopain gel, ICPA health products Ltd, Ankleshwar, India), cetacaine anesthetic liquid (Cetylite Industries, Inc, Pennsauken, NJ), and EMLA cream (2% AstraZeneca UK Ltd, Luton, UK), respectively, according to manufacturer's instructions, for 1 minute prior to local anesthetic injection. After application of topical anesthetic agent, for all the groups, baseline pre-operative (prior to topical anesthetic administration) and post-operative scores (after local anesthetic administration) of pulse rate was recorded using Pulse oximeter (Gibson, Fingertip Pulse Oximeter, MD300C29, Beijing Choice Electronic). Peri-operative (i.e., during the administration of local anesthesia) scores were recorded using Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) Scale, Modified Children hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CPS) behavior rating scale, and Faces Pain Scale (FPS-R) - Revised (For self-reported pain). Direct self-reported and physiological measures were ascertained using FPS-R - Revised and Pulse oximeter, respectively, whereas CPS and FLACC scales assessed behavioral measures. To test the mean difference between the three groups, a one way ANOVA with post hoc tests was used. For statistical significance, a two-tailed probability value of P < 0.05 was considered as significant. Results: The Cetacaine group had significantly lower pain scores for self-report (P < 0.001), behavioral, and physiological measures (P < 0.001) than the other two groups. However, there was no significant difference between the Benzocaine group and EMLA group during palatal injection prick. Conclusion: Cetacaine can be considered as an effective topical anesthetic agent compared to benzocaine 20% jelly (Mucopain gel) and EMLA cream.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.135-141
• /
• 2023

Background: The limited studies on the effect of buffering on the clinical efficacy of articaine have reported controversial results. The purpose of this study was to clinically compare the pain of injection, anesthetic success, onset, and duration of pulpal anesthesia of buffered 4% articaine with epinephrine 1:100000 versus a non-buffered 4% articaine with epinephrine 1:100000 formulation for buccal infiltration of the mandibular first molar. Methods: Sixty-three volunteers were enrolled in the study. All volunteers received two injections consisting of a single mandibular first molar buccal infiltration with 1.8 ml of 4% articaine with epinephrine 1:100000 and 1.8 ml of 4% articaine with epinephrine 1:100000 buffered with 8.4% sodium bicarbonate. The infiltrations were applied in two separate appointments spaced at least one week apart. After injection of the anesthetic solution at the examined site, the first molar was pulp-tested every 2 min for the next 60 min. Results: Successful pulpal anesthesia was recorded in 69.8% of cases using non-buffered articaine solution and 76.2% of cases using buffered articaine solution, with no significant difference between the formulations (P = 0.219). The mean time of anesthesia onset for the volunteers with successful anesthetic outcome in both formulations (n = 43) was 6.6 ± 1.6 min for the non-buffered articaine solution and 4.5 ± 1.6 min for the buffered solution, which differed significantly (P = 0.001). In the same volunteers, the mean duration of pulpal anesthesia was 28.4 ± 7.1 min for non-buffered articaine solution and 30.2 ± 8.5 min for buffered articaine solution, with no significant difference between the formulations (P = 0.231). Considering the pain of injection, regardless of the anesthetic success, the mean values of VAS were 11.3 ± 8.2 mm for the non-buffered articaine solution and 7.8 ±6.5 mm for the buffered articaine solution, which differed significantly (P = 0.001 < 0.05). Conclusion: According to the present study, 4% articaine with epinephrine can benefit from buffering and provide better anesthetic behavior, with improved onset and less pain during injection.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.6
• /
• pp.575-582
• /
• 2021

Background: The aim of this randomized, triple-blind trial was to determine the anesthetic, analgesic, and hemodynamic effects of articaine and bupivacaine in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molar teeth. Methods: Twenty-six patients who underwent removal of bilaterally symmetric mandibular third molars were randomly assigned to articaine and bupivacaine groups in a split-mouth design. The onset of anesthetic action, intraoperative comfort, total amount of solution used, duration of postoperative anesthesia and analgesia, rescue analgesic use, postoperative pain, intraoperative bleeding, and hemodynamic parameters were evaluated. Results: In the articaine group, the onset of anesthetic activity was faster, intraoperative comfort was greater, and effective anesthesia required less local anesthetic solution. The bupivacaine group showed a significantly longer duration of postoperative anesthesia and analgesia, in addition to lower visual analog scale values at 6 and 48 hours postoperatively. There were no significant differences between the two solutions regarding rescue analgesic medication use, intraoperative bleeding, or hemodynamics. Conclusion: Articaine showed greater clinical efficacy than bupivacaine in intraoperative anesthesia, achieving faster onset of anesthetic action and greater patient comfort while also requiring less reinforcement during surgery. However, bupivacaine was superior in terms of postoperative anesthesia, reducing postoperative pain due to its residual anesthetic and analgesic effects. Both anesthetic solutions led to similar hemodynamics at low doses in mandibular third molar surgery

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.41-47
• /
• 2021

Background: This study was designed to compare the efficacy of DentalVibe against 2% lidocaine gel in reducing pain during the administration of local anesthetic injection in the adult population. Methods: This was a split-mouth open-label, randomized, controlled clinical study conducted in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of a dental institute. Fifty patients who were scheduled for bilateral dental extractions requiring an inferior alveolar nerve block were enrolled in the study. Site A (n = 50) was coated with 2% lidocaine gel followed by a local anesthetic injection, and DentalVibe with local anesthetic injection was used for Site B (n = 50). The primary outcome was pain, which was recorded immediately after the administration of anesthetic injection using the Visual Analogue Scale [VAS 0 - 10]. Results: The VAS pain scores ranged from 4 to 10 for site A and 0 to 6 for site B. Comparison between the two sites showed a statistically significant difference [Mann-Whitney U test value = 51.50, P < 0.001] favoring site B. Conclusion: This study showed that DentalVibe reduces pain during injection of local anesthesia compared to topical anesthetic gel.