Introduction: Oral anticoagulants are widely used worldwide for many systemic diseases. Recent oral surgical protocols suggest that therapeutic levels of the anticoagulant drug should be maintained for simple dental extractions because bleeding complications could be managed with proper local hemostasis. The aim of the present study was to compare bleeding complication of three different local hemostatic agents for dental extractions without interrupting drug administration in patients undergoing oral Vitamin K antagonist chronic anticoagulant therapy. Material and Methods: Randomized control trial of three hemostatic agents for dental extractions, in patients under oral anticoagulant therapy without drug interruption. The present study included 240 patients with international normalized ratio between 1.5 and 3.5. Patients took their anticoagulation drug normally. A single surgeon performed calibrated simple dental extractions and applied a plug of bismuth subgallate (BS), fibrin tissue adhesive (FTA) or microfibrillar collagen (MC), assigned randomly. Statistical analysis of bleeding between the groups was performed using the Chi-square test. Results: There was no hemorrhagic complication in the BS group, and only one in the FTA group. However, in the MC group, 10 patients (12.5%) suffered postoperative bleeding. Data analysis showed statistical differences between the MC group and the other two groups ( P < 0.05). Discussion: BS and FTA showed similar clinical effectiveness and were more effective than MC for the control of postoperative bleeding in oral anticoagulated patients.

No abstract

BackgroundTo compare global surgical pain under nerve block and mandibular infiltration anesthesia techniques, and to evaluate pain during drilling and the distance to the mandibular canal in posterior mandible implant surgeries.Material and MethodsA prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind, clinical trial was conducted to compare nerve block (Group A) to mandibular infiltration (Group B) techniques for dental implant placement. Global surgical pain (VAS = visual analogue scale), pain during drilling or implant placement (MPQ = McGill pain questionnaire) and distance to the mandibular canal (Image J) were statically analyzed. Age, gender, anxiety levels, tooth to be replaced, implant size, adjacent teeth and duration of surgery were also analyzed.Results172 patients were included and 283 dental implants were analyzed. VAS values were significantly higher in Group B (p<0.05). In Group A, 99% of the surgeries were performed painlessly during drilling and implant placement, but in Group B, 11.6% of implant placements (17 implants) felt pain during these surgical steps. Mean distance to mandibular canal (3.8 mm, range: 0.0 to 7.0) in those 17 implants placed under mandibular infiltration was clinically and statistically similar to the mean distance (3.0 mm, range: 0.0 to 9.0) of 130 implants placed painless (p=0.10). Pain during drilling under mandibular infiltration was significantly associated with the duration of surgery (p<0.05) and to both adjacent teeth being present (p<0.05).ConclusionsAlthough both techniques are safe and effective for placing implants in the posterior mandible, nerve block provides a more profound analgesia than mandibular infiltration. When placing implants under mandibular infiltration, as getting closer to the canal does not increase the feeling of pain, it is not recommended to use the presence of pain as a preventive resource to avoid inferior alveolar nerve injuries. Key words:Dental implant, mandibular infiltration anesthesia, nerve block, pain, nerve injury.

No abstract

The use of osseointegratable titanium dental implants (TDI) has revolutionized clinical dental practice and has shown a high rate