Local Anaesthesia in Dentistry: A Review

Decloux, Derek; Ouanounou, Aviv

doi:10.1111/idj.12615

Cited by 39 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This result may be explained by the adherence to recommended dosages to avoid adverse effects and systemic toxicity. Also, the articaine has the simplest and most rapid metabolism of the amides due to its carboxyl group ester linkage that easily breakdown by plasma cholinesterase (35,36) .…”

Section: Mcentarfer Et Al (2005)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Anesthetic Efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent Versus 2% Mepecaine-L for Infiltration Anesthesia in Extraction of Badly Decayed Lower First Primary Molars: A Pilot Study

Hosny

Gawad

Aly

2021

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent anesthetic solution compared to 2% Mepecaine-L anesthetic solution in extraction of badly decayed mandibular first primary molar for infiltration in children aged from 6 to 8 years.Methodology: Twenty children with 20 badly decayed mandibular first primary molars indicated for extraction divided randomly into two equal groups (n= 10), group A received 4% Artpharmadent and group B received 2% Mepecaine-L anesthetic solution for infiltration. Intraoperative pain, the need for supplemental injection during extraction, adverse effects following the anesthetic injection, and the clinical success of the treatment were evaluated for both groups.Results: Both groups showed nearly similar results regarding intraoperative pain using Wong-Baker Face Pain Scale (WBFPS), and Sound, eyes, and motor (SEM) scale, regarding the need for supplemental injection during the extraction, and the adverse effects following the anesthetic injection (non-significant difference statistically).Conclusions: Both the 4% Artpharmadent and 2% Mepecaine-L are equally effective in controlling intraoperative pain during the extraction of mandibular molars and both are safe when used in children.

show abstract

Section: Mcentarfer Et Al (2005)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Anesthetic Efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent Versus 2% Mepecaine-L for Infiltration Anesthesia in Extraction of Badly Decayed Lower First Primary Molars: A Pilot Study

Hosny

Gawad

Aly

2021

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If a total of 175 mg can be safely administered to a child weighing 25 kg, this means that 175/36 = 4.8 or 5 cartridges of lidocaine with epinephrine (1.8 ml of solution) can be safely administered. The use of local and regional analgesia minimizes the need for opioids and sedatives, which is beneficial for aggressive postoperative physical therapy [20].…”

Section: Local Anesthesiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral care precautions for patients with cystic fibrosis

Goumghar¹,

Sidqui²

2021

Magna Sci. Adv. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is the most common severe autosomal recessive disease in the Caucasian population. Although it remains incurable, it is currently possible to extend the life expectancy of patients with modern therapeutic possibilities. Given the medical issues that a child with CF faces, oral health may be perceived as being of lesser importance. Thus, the establishment of good dietary and oral hygiene practices may not take place, leading to an increased risk of caries and gingivitis due to poor oral hygiene. A change in patient management may be necessary to ensure optimal care.

show abstract

“…Studies proved there is no discernible buffered and nonbuffered formula in their efficacy as local anaesthic drugs (Shurtz et al, 2015). When compared to standard 2 percent Lidocaine, the advantages of utilizing 4 percent Articaine include reduced toxicity following unintended intravascular administration, quick onset of surgical anaesthetic, and greater penetration through periodontal tissues (Camiel et al, 2021;Decloux & Ouanounou, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The efficiency of Articaine only buccal infiltration technique as alternative local anaesthesia technique to inferior alveolar nerve block

Osailan¹

2022

Medical Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block (IANB) and other nerve blocks are associated with an increased risk of nerve injury. Articaine-only infiltrations, which include buccal injections, are recently showing comparable effectiveness to Lidocaine IAN blocks for mandibular teeth, therefore reducing the need for an IAN block. The study aims to assess Articaine only infiltration (AOBIT) effectiveness in administering local anaesthesia for monotonous mandibular teeth extractions in adults. Methods: This research consist 172 patients, both male and female, varying in age from 18 to 75 years. In all 204 mandibular teeth in which 182 excessively decayed mandibular molars and 22 premolars were extracted. The local anaesthesia was given by a specialist OS and extraction was done by UG students under the super-vision of consultant. AOBIT effectiveness was assessed in contrast to the necessity for repeated Articaine infiltrations or rescue IANB with Lidocaine 2%. Results: From the total of 172 patients; 96 (55.8%) were males and 76 (44.2%) were females. Age range was from 18-75 years with the mean of 40 ± 13.7 years. depending only on the AOBIT, sufficient anaesthesia was obtained in 86.7 % of 172 patients and 204 teeth, In the remaining 13.3% of patients, a 'rescue' 2% Lidocaine IAN block is required. Conclusion: For normal adult mandibular tooth extractions, Articaine 4% alone (AOBIT) technique of buccal infiltration might be a good alternative to Inferior-Alveolar-Nerve-Block with Lidocaine 2%, success rate was remarkable and this technique could help in reducing nerve injuries due to IAN and lingual nerve blocks.

show abstract

Local Anaesthesia in Dentistry: A Review

Cited by 39 publications

References 52 publications

Anesthetic Efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent Versus 2% Mepecaine-L for Infiltration Anesthesia in Extraction of Badly Decayed Lower First Primary Molars: A Pilot Study

Anesthetic Efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent Versus 2% Mepecaine-L for Infiltration Anesthesia in Extraction of Badly Decayed Lower First Primary Molars: A Pilot Study

Oral care precautions for patients with cystic fibrosis

The efficiency of Articaine only buccal infiltration technique as alternative local anaesthesia technique to inferior alveolar nerve block

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About