• International Journal of Oral Biology
• /
• v.41 no.4
• /
• pp.191-197
• /
• 2016

The present study was to evaluate effects of vitamin E on intravenous administration of lidocaine-induced antinociception. Experiments were carried out using male Sprague-Dawley rats. Orofacial formalin-induced nociceptive behavioral responses were used as the orofacial animal pain model. Subcutaneous injection of formalin produced significant nociceptive scratching behavior. Intraperitoneal injection of 5 and 10 mg/kg of lidocaine attenuated formalin-induced nociceptive behavior in the 2nd phase, compared to the vehicle-treated group. Intraperitoneal injection of 1 g/kg of vitamin E also attenuated the formalin-induced nociceptive behavior in the 2nd phase, compared to the vehicle-treated group. However, low dose of vitamin E (0.5 g/kg) did not affect the nociceptive behavioral responses produced by subcutaneous injection of formalin. The present study also investigated effects of intraperitoneal injection of both vitamin E and lidocaine on orofacial formalin-induced behavioral responses. Vehicle treatment affected neither formalin-induced behavioral responses nor lidocaine-induced antinociceptive effects. However, intraperitoneal injection of 0.5 g/kg of vitamin E enhanced the lidocaine-induced antinociceptive effects in the 2nd phase compared to the vehicle-treated group. Intraperitoneal injection of naloxone, an opioid receptor antagonist, did not affect antinociception produced by intraperitoneal injections of both vitamin E and lidocaine. These results suggest that treatment with vitamin E enhances the systemic treatment with lidocaine-induced antinociception and reduces side effects when systemically treated with lidocaine. Therefore, the combined treatment with vitamin E and lidocaine is a potential therapeutic for chronic orofacial pain.

• Journal of The Korean Dental Society of Anesthesiology
• /
• v.1 no.1 s.1
• /
• pp.26-31
• /
• 2001

The wide deep penetrating wound of maxillofacial region should be early closed under emergency general anesthesia for the prevention of complications of bleeding, infection, shock & residual scars. But, if the emergency general anesthesia wound be impossible because of pneumoconiosis, obstructive pulmonary disease & hypovolemic shock, early primary closure should be done under local anesthesia by use of much amount of the anesthetic solution. The maximum dose of dental lidocaine (2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine) is reported to 7 mg/kg under 500 mg (13.8 ampules) in normal adult. But the maximum permissible dose of dental lidocaine can be changed owing to the general health, rapidity of injection, resorption, distribution & excretion of the drug. The blood level of overdose toxicity is above $4.0{\mu}g/ml$ in central nervous & cardiovascular system. The injection of dental lidocaine 1-4 ampules is attained to the blood level of $1{\mu}g/ml$ in normal healthy adult. The duration of anesthetic action in the dental 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 1 : 100.000 epinephrine is 45 to 75 minutes and the period to elimination is about 2 to 4 hours. Therefore, authors selected the following anesthetic methods that the first injection of 6 ampules is applied into the deeper periosteal layer for anesthetic action during 1 hour, the second injection into the deeper muscle & fascial layer, the third injection into the superficial muscle and fascial layer, the fourth injection into the proximal skin & subcutaneous tissue and the fifth final injection into the distal skin & subcutaneous tissue. The total 26-28 ampules of dental lidocaine were injected into the wound as the regular time interval during 5-6 hours, but there were no systemic complications, such as, agitation, talkativeness, convulsion and specific change of vital signs and consciousness.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Laryngology, Phoniatrics and Logopedics
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.94-97
• /
• 2021

Muscle tension dysphonia (MTD) is a voice disorder characterized by excessive tension of the laryngeal muscles during phonation. Voice therapy is the gold standard of treatment for MTD. However, patients with MTD do not always respond to voice therapy. Multidisciplinary approaches have been attempted to treat intractable MTD such as lidocaine instillation, lidocaine injection to recurrent laryngeal nerve, botox injection and excision of false ventricle using CO₂ laser. Recently, injection laryngoplasty is suggested that assists in more efficient phonation and voice therapy to MTD patients. A patient with intractable MTD underwent lidocaine injection and injection laryngoplasty showed improved voice quality and remained stable until postoperative 3 months without any complications.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.276-282
• /
• 2005

Inferior alveolar nerve block using lidocaine is the most frequent local anesthetic method in the dental treatment, but clinically it is not always successful. The 2% lidocaine cartridge has been used commonly in dental anesthesia. It contains vasoconstrictor and antioxidant, which presents low pH which provides chemical stability and longer shelf life. But alkalinized local anesthetics has less tissue trauma, easier dissociation of the non-ionized base which penetrates nerve sheath, rapid onset and more intensity. In this study, in inferior alveolar nerve block, alkalinized lidocaine using sodium bicarbonate (experimental group) is compared with plain lidocaine (control group) about injection pain, anesthetic onset, duration and postinjection discomfort. In inferior alveolar nerve block, alkalinized lidocaine using sodium bicarbonate showed lower injection pain. There was significant difference statistically from plain lidocaine(p=0.019). Comparing with plain lidocaine, alkalinized lidocaine produced more rapid onset (lip & pulp anesthetic onset), there was no significant difference(p>0.05). but there was boundary significance (0.050.05). These results suggest that addition of sodium bicarbonate to 2% lidocaine(1:100,000 epinephrine) for inferior alveolar nerve block is more effective for reduction of injection pain and onset time.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.47 no.3
• /
• pp.25.1-25.11
• /
• 2022

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of 5% lidocaine and 2.5% lidocaine/2.5% prilocaine topical anesthetic on pain during needle insertion and infiltration injection in the labial mucosa of anterior maxillary teeth, and to assess the relationship between patients' anxiety and pain scores. Materials and Methods: The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale questionnaire was applied and recorded. Patients were randomly divided into 4 groups (n = 30), as follows: G1 group: 5% lidocaine and placebo for 1 minute, G2 group: 2.5% lidocaine/2.5% prilocaine and placebo for 1 minute, G3 group: 5% lidocaine and placebo for 3 minutes, and G4 group: 2.5% lidocaine/2.5% prilocaine and placebo for 3 minutes. Before the application of topical anesthesia, one side was randomly selected as the topical anesthesia and the contralateral side as the placebo. The pain levels were measured with Visual Analog Scale (VAS) immediately after needle insertion and injection and were compared. The correlation between anxiety and pain scores was analyzed. Results: Administration of 5% lidocaine for 1 minute had significantly higher pain scores for both insertion and infiltration injection than the other groups (p < 0.05). There was a significant moderate positive correlation between dental anxiety and the injection-induced VAS pain score in the placebo side in all groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Topical anesthetics significantly reduced the pain caused by both needle insertion and injection pain in comparison to the placebo side. The pain scores of patients with dental anxiety were lower on the topical anesthesia compared to the placebo side.

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.30 no.3
• /
• pp.345-351
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this double-blind study was to evaluate clinical effects of botulinum toxin type A (BTX-A) injection on myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) involving upper trapezius and compare with those of lidocaine injection. 21 patients presenting with active TrP1 and/or TrP2 in the upper trapezius over 6 months were selected for this study. The subjects were randomly divided into two groups; one group injected with BTX-A (15 unit of $Botox^{(R)}$ / 0.3 ml per trigger point (TrP)) and the other group injected with 0.5% lidocaine (0.3 ml /TrP). The clinical effects were evaluated by VAS and PPT at baseline, 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks after treatment. BTX-A group showed persistent decrease of VAS values and increase of PPT values following treatment. While there was no significant difference in VAS values between BTX-A and lidocaine groups (p=0.347), there was significant difference in PPT values after treatment between two groups (p=0.000). The subjects received BTX-A showed noticeable improvement in PPT values after treatment, suggesting more reliable effect of BTX-A injection compared with lidocaine injection. The results of this study support that the direct injection of BTX-A to a TrP is an effective and safe treatment for MPS involving upper trapezius.

• Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.30-34
• /
• 1994

Local anesthetics produce pain during infiltration into skin. The relationship between local anesthetic-induced pain and pH of the local anesthetic solution has not been fully investigated. Commercial preparation of local anesthetics are prepared as acidic solutions of the salts to promote solubility and stability. And the acidity of local anesthetic solition may be related with the pain during infiltration of the solutione. So, we tried to neutralize the lidocaine hydrochloride solution which is one of the most frequently used local anesthetic agent. Sodium bicarbonate was used for neutralization. Sodium bicarbonate was mixed with lidocaine hydrochloride until the resulting pH of the solution become 7.4 which is identical to the acidity of body fluid. To identify the effect of neutralized lidocaine solution, we had a course of double blind test to 6 volunteers. Both forearm of each volunteer were injected with neutralized lidocaine and plain one, and the degree of pain was estimated by each volunteers. According to subjective description by the volinteers, everyone felt neutralized lidocaine injection site was less painful than plain lidocaine. We concluded that we could reduce pain from infiltration of lidocaine hydrochloride by neutralization of the anesthetic solution with sodium bicarbonate.

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.25-34
• /
• 2005

A trigger point injection (TPI) has been reported to have an immediate analgesic effect, and to be one of the most widely employed treatment methods of myofascial pain. There are normal saline, local anesthetics, and steroids as the solutions frequently used in TPI. They can be used separately or in combination. Local anaesthetics have myotoxicity in proportion to its concentration. The purpose of this study was to evaluate microstructural changes in point of the myotoxic effects of the combined solution of lidocaine and dexamethasone (a local anesthetic and a steroid) after being injected into the muscle of BALB/c mice. And this study tested solutions with various concentration separately and in combination, to find out proper concentration of solution without muscular tissue damage. This study shows that lidocaine and dexamethasone combination is not histologically myotoxic in case of the concentration of lidocaine less than 1.5%. Also it is suggested from this study that this combined solution will have an analgesic and anti-inflammatory effect. Hereafter continuous study should be performed to reveal that these results can be applied to human when lidocaine and dexamethasone combination is used as an injection modality of TrP treatment.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.93-98
• /
• 1995

Arthritis is one of the most common disease of mankind. Major of arthritis is osteoarthritis(OA), but the cause is not clear and the characters are chronic and often progressive. So the management and the pain control of OA are very difficult and adequate ways of controlling it have not been discovered. In the present study we investigated the effects of Knee Intra-articular Injection(KII) of lidocaine with aspirin on OA of the knee. Thirty OA patients with Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) above 8 were studied and they were divided into two groups as follows; Group I(n=15); KII with 1% lidocaine 5 ml Group II(n=15); KII with 2% lidocaine 2 ml and aspirin 2 ml(180 mg, diluted with normal saline) In two groups, KII was done 2 times a week for 4 weeks and we compared the changes of VAS between two groups. The results were as follows; 1) Before the KII, initial mean VAS of group I and II was 8.8 and 8.9. After KII 2 times, VAS of group I and II was 6.6 and 6.4. These deceases were statistically significant, but there was no significant difference of VAS between two groups. 2) After KII 4 times, VAS of group I and II was 6.3 and 5.5, significant decrease was observed in group II. 3) After KII 6 times and 8 times, VAS of group I and II was not decreased anymore, but the VAS of group II was maintained in significant decreased state that of group I. We experienced that KII of lidocaine with aspirin was more effective than that of lidocaine only. So we suggest that KII of mixed solution of lidocaine and apsirin may be one of treatments for OA of the knee.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.121-128
• /
• 2015

Background: The authors studied the hemodynamic effect influent by using the novel high concentration of lidocaine HCl for surgical removal impacted lower third molar. The objective of this study was to evaluate the hemodynamic change when using different concentrations of lidocaine in impacted lower third molar surgery. Methods: Split mouth single blind study comprising 31 healthy patients with a mean age of 23 years (range 19-33 years). Subjects had symmetrically impacted lower third molars as observed on panoramic radiograph. Each participant required 2 surgical interventions by the same surgeon with a 3-week washout period washout period. The participants were alternately assigned one of two types of local anesthetic (left or right) for the first surgery, then the other type of anesthetic for the second surgery. One solution was 4% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and the other was 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. A standard IANB with 1.8 ml volume was used. Any requirement for additional anesthetic and patient pain intra-operation was recorded. Post-operatively, patient was instructed to fill in the patient report form for any adverse effect and local anesthetic preference in terms of intra-operative pain. This form was collected at the seven day follow up appointment. Results: In the 4% lidocaine group, the heart rate increased during the first minute post-injection (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant change in arterial blood pressure during the operation. In the 2% lidocaine group, there was a significant increase in arterial blood pressure and heart rate in the first minute following injection for every procedure. When the hemodynamic changes in each group were compared, the 4% lidocaine group had significantly lower arterial blood pressure compared to the 2% lidocaine group following injection. Post-operatively, no adverse effects were observed by the operator and patient in either local anesthetic group. Patients reported less pain intra-operation in the 4% lidocaine group compared with the 2% lidocaine group (P < .05). Conclusions: Our results suggest that a 4% concentration of lidocaine HCl with 1:100,000 epinephrine has better clinical efficacy than 2% lidocaine HCl with 1:100,000 epinephrine when used for surgical extraction of lower third molars. Neither drug had any clinical adverse effects.