How should we anaesthetise painful mandibular premolars?
Design Randomised clinical trial Study population The present study evaluated patients of different genders aged between 18-65 years old. The study design and the language of the consent form were approved by the Ethics Committee at Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) (approval code: IR.TUM...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Evidence-based dentistry 2020-03, Vol.21 (1), p.20-21 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Design
Randomised clinical trial
Study population
The present study evaluated patients of different genders aged between 18-65 years old. The study design and the language of the consent form were approved by the Ethics Committee at Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) (approval code: IR.TUMS.REC.1394.1906). The study was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials.
Data Analysis
The evaluation was performed using the Heft-Parker Visual Analog Scale (HP VAS) and complemented with the electrical pulp test accuracy to determine the success of anaesthesia
Results
In this study, the success rate was 93.8% (95% CI 79.19-99.23) for mental/incisive nerve block (MINB), and 81.2% (95% CI 63.56-92.79) for inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB). The difference was not significant (p = 0.26). An interesting result was the combination of both techniques was 100% successful in the failed cases (2 in MINB group; 6 in IANB group).
Conclusions
In conclusion, MINB using 4% Articaine showed a similar success rate as IANB using 4% Articaine in local anaesthesia for mandibular premolars with irreversible pulpitis. The beginning of anaesthesia was faster for MINB, and the injection was painless. The post-injection pain for MINB was higher than for IANB. Both techniques showed similar efficacy. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1462-0049 1476-5446 |
DOI: | 10.1038/s41432-020-0080-z |