Literature DB >> 15384291

A comparison of intraoral injection discomfort produced by plain and epinephrine-containing lidocaine local anesthetic solutions: a randomized, double-blind, split-mouth, volunteer investigation.

J G Meechan1, P F Day.   

Abstract

The authors report a clinical trial designed to compare the discomfort produced by plain and epinephrine-containing lidocaine solutions during local anesthesia in the maxilla. Twenty-four healthy volunteers were recruited; each received buccal and palatal infiltrations on each side of the maxilla in the premolar region. The solutions were 2% lidocaine and 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine. Allocation to side was randomized and operator and volunteer were blinded to the identity of the solutions. Volunteers recorded injection discomfort on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). Volunteers were included in the trial if a score of at least 30 mm was recorded for at least 1 of the matched pair of injections. Differences between treatments were measured using Student's paired t test. Twelve volunteers recorded a VAS score of at least 30 mm for 1 or both buccal injections, and 17 volunteers reached this score for palatal injections. Buccal injection pain was less when the plain solution was used (P = .04) and was not influenced by the order of the injection. Palatal injection discomfort did not differ between the solutions; however, the second palatal injection was more uncomfortable than the first palatal injection (P = .046). These results suggest that plain lidocaine produces less discomfort than lidocaine with epinephrine when administered into the maxillary premolar buccal sulcus in individuals who report moderate pain during this injection. Palatal injection discomfort does not differ between these solutions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 15384291      PMCID: PMC2007391     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Prog        ISSN: 0003-3006


  18 in total

1.  Local anesthesia in the palate: a comparison of techniques and solutions.

Authors:  J G Meechan; P F Day; A S McMillan
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2000

2.  Sodium bicarbonate attenuates pain on skin infiltration with lidocaine, with or without epinephrine.

Authors:  W McKay; R Morris; P Mushlin
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 5.108

3.  The temperature of local anaesthetic solutions.

Authors:  J P Rood
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  1977-09       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Periodontal ligament injection: with or without a vasoconstrictor?

Authors:  R J Gray; A M Lomax; J P Rood
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  1987-04-11       Impact factor: 1.626

Review 5.  Vasoconstrictors and local anesthesia: a review and rationale for use.

Authors:  J T Jastak; J A Yagiela
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 3.634

6.  Pressures created by dental injections.

Authors:  E L Pashley; R Nelson; D H Pashley
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  1981-10       Impact factor: 6.116

7.  A study of pH of dental local anaesthetic solutions.

Authors:  A P Moorthy; S P Moorthy; R O'Neil
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  1984-12-08       Impact factor: 1.626

8.  Pain and temperature sensations related to local analgesia.

Authors:  V J Oikarinen; P Ylipaavalniemi; H Evers
Journal:  Int J Oral Surg       Date:  1975-09

9.  Cardiovascular responses to intraosseous injections of prilocaine containing vasoconstrictors.

Authors:  B Lilienthal
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol       Date:  1976-11

10.  Haemodynamic changes under emotional stress following a minor surgical procedure under local anaesthesia.

Authors:  F U Meyer
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1987-12       Impact factor: 2.789

View more
  10 in total

1.  Anesthetic efficacy of 3 volumes of lidocaine with epinephrine in maxillary infiltration anesthesia.

Authors:  Paula Cristina Brunetto; José Ranali; Gláucia Maria Bovi Ambrosano; Patrícia Cristine de Oliveira; Francisco Carlos Groppo; John Gerard Meechan; Maria Cristina Volpato
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2008

Review 2.  Local anesthesia part 2: technical considerations.

Authors:  Kenneth L Reed; Stanley F Malamed; Andrea M Fonner
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2012

3.  Factors influencing the discomfort of intraoral needle penetration.

Authors:  J G Meechan; P C Howlett; B D Smith
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2005

4.  Comparison of the effectiveness of lidocaine in permanent maxillary teeth removal performed with single buccal infiltration versus routine buccal and palatal injection.

Authors:  Ramesh Kumaresan; Balamanikanda Srinivasan; Sivakumar Pendayala
Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg       Date:  2014-04-27

5.  Pain control in local analgesia.

Authors:  J G Meechan
Journal:  Eur Arch Paediatr Dent       Date:  2009-06

Review 6.  Various strategies for pain-free root canal treatment.

Authors:  Masoud Parirokh; Paul V Abbott
Journal:  Iran Endod J       Date:  2013-12-24

7.  The most painful site of maxillary anterior infiltrations.

Authors:  Roohollah Sharifi; Hesamedin Nazari; Peik Bolourchi; Saber Khazaei; Masoud Parirokh
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2016 Nov-Dec

8.  Anesthetic Efficacy of Lidocaine/Ketorolac in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in Patients with Irreversible Pulpitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Hessamoddin Faghihian; Reyhaneh Faghihian; Abbasali Khademi; Vivek Aggarwal
Journal:  Eur Endod J       Date:  2020-12

Review 9.  Anesthetic efficacies of buccal with palatal injection versus buccal with intra-septal injection in permanent maxillary first molars of pediatric patients.

Authors:  Peecharat Areenoo; Chanika Manmontri; Nattakan Chaipattanawan; Papimon Chompu-Inwai; Manop Khanijou; Thongnard Kumchai; Natthamet Wongsirichat
Journal:  J Dent Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2022-07-26

10.  Periodontal ligament injection versus routine local infiltration for nonsurgical single posterior maxillary permanent tooth extraction: comparative double-blinded randomized clinical study.

Authors:  Mohammad H Al-Shayyab
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2017-10-06       Impact factor: 2.423

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.