Anesthetic efficacy of the supplemental intraosseous injection of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in irreversible pulpitis

Nusstein, John; Reader, Al; Nist, Robert; Beck, Mike; Meyers, William J.

doi:10.1016/s0099-2399(98)80053-8

Cited by 194 publications

(181 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

147

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…69 The articaine IANB and PDL injection success rate (83%) was higher than lignocaine (56%) when used in a similar setting. 70 Articaine in an intraosseous injection (IO) supplemental to IANB and LB in mandibular posterior teeth with IP had a success rate of 86% when delivered with the Stabident system (Fairfax Dental Inc., Miami, FL, USA), 71 which were comparable to success rates of lignocaine Stabident injections supplemental to IANB in mandibular posterior teeth with IP of 90 and 91% 72,73 and with lignocaine X-tip (X-tip Technologies, Lakewood, NJ, USA) IO injections of 82%. 74 In general, the evidence indicates little benefit in using articaine for IP (Table 2).…”

Section: Local Anaesthetic Failurementioning

confidence: 98%

Articaine: a review of the literature

Yapp¹,

Hopcraft

Parashos

2011

Br Dent J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Local Anaesthetic Failurementioning

confidence: 98%

Articaine: a review of the literature

Yapp¹,

Hopcraft

Parashos

2011

Br Dent J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It was difficult to compare the findings of current study with those from previous studies because the type of surgery, the number of subjects, and the measured variables were different. In general, the mandibular teeth pulp anesthesia was 100% successful with none of the techniques (20); therefore, it is better to use a supplemental techniques like intraosseous (26,27) or PDL injection (28) during treatment. In this study, the indicator of anesthesia was numbness of lower lip while this is not an adequate indicator of pulp anesthesia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of the Gow-Gates and Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Techniques in Providing Anesthesia During Surgical Removal of Impacted Lower Third Molar: A Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial

Jamalpour¹,

Talimkhani²

2013

Avicenna J Dent Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:In spite of common usage of the inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB), this method has some well-defined restrictions. Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to compare these two techniques for the surgical removal of impacted lower third molars. Patients and Methods: A total of 44 similarly impacted lower third molars (22 patients with two similar teeth) were selected. In each patient, one side was anesthetized with the Gow-Gates technique and another side with the IANB, randomly. The number of injections for achieving anesthesia, incidence of pain during injections, and the supplementary injections during surgery were recorded for each side Results: In Gow-Gates technique, less repetition of injection was required to achieve anesthesia as well as less supplementary injections during surgery; however, these differences were not significant statistically (P = 0.39, P = 0.11). The pain during Gow-Gates injections was significantly shorter than that of the IANB (P = 0.007). Conclusions: Even though the patients felt less pain during the Gow-Gates injection, this technique has no advantage over the IANB during surgical removal of impacted lower third molar.

show abstract

“…According to Nusstein et al [30], 81-83% of the patients who sought emergency care with moderate to severe pain took until nine days to seek treatment and most of them had taken medication to relieve the symptoms [30]. Other non-pharmacological approaches have been used to control fear, anxiety and stress, such as the behavioral techniques (modeling, conditioning, and hypnosis) [19].…”

Section: Systemic Drugs -Pain Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The patients with irreversible pulpitis may have eight times more failure in anesthetic technique compared with normal patients [4,30,39,40].…”

Section: Systemic Drugs -Pain Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical strategies for managing emergency endodontic pain

Francisco¹,

Suzuki²,

Lima³

et al. 2017

RSBO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Pulpal and periradicular pain is leading cause of emergency care demand. Literature review: Pain management in endodontics includes important aspects for its control and prevention, such as reducing anxiety and preoperative pain, control of intraoperative pain and the treatment of postoperative pain. These review pointed out some important measures that may be the key for the effectiveness control and prevention of pain in endodontic procedures. One of the effective strategies currently used in these cases is structured to evaluate the painful condition through a 3-D approach which establish a differential diagnosis, definitive treatment, and rational use of drugs, based on the most appropriate scientific evidence available in the literature.

show abstract

Anesthetic efficacy of the supplemental intraosseous injection of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in irreversible pulpitis

Cited by 194 publications

References 10 publications

Articaine: a review of the literature

Articaine: a review of the literature

Efficacy of the Gow-Gates and Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Techniques in Providing Anesthesia During Surgical Removal of Impacted Lower Third Molar: A Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial

Clinical strategies for managing emergency endodontic pain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About