| Literature DB >> 26730209 |
Abstract
Four percent articaine local anesthetic has been successfully used to attain local anesthesia for dental procedures. Mandibular block anesthesia may consume longer time to attain and have a higher failure of local anesthesia compared to infiltration. Mandibular facial infiltration has been reported to successfully attain effective local anesthesia for dental procedures. This study involved only several tooth sites and found that 1.8 cc of 4% articaine facial infiltration in the mandible may be effective when the facial mandibular cortex is <2.0-3.0 mm. A waiting time of 5-10 minutes may be required for effective anesthesia. An additional 1.8 cc of dose may be required to attain anesthesia if an initial 1.8 cc of dose fails. The need for additional anesthetic may be predicted by a measurement of the facial cortex using cone beam computerized tomography. A study of mandibular sites is needed to delineate the anatomical dimensions, density of cortical bone, and apical neural location for ensuring successful local anesthetic infiltration.Entities:
Keywords: articaine; dental implant; dental restoration; infiltration; local anesthesia
Year: 2015 PMID: 26730209 PMCID: PMC4694664 DOI: 10.2147/LRA.S94647
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Local Reg Anesth ISSN: 1178-7112
Figure 1Mandibular infiltration is delivered to the facial aspect of the mandible.
Figure 2Measurements were taken on the CBCT from the tooth apex to the facial aspect of the mandible and the thickness of the cortex at that location.
Abbreviation: CBCT, cone beam computerized tomography.
An electrical pulp tester was used to determine if the subject tooth was anesthetized at 2, 5, and 10 minutes after infiltration of articaine
| Patient | Tooth number | Apical cortical thickness on CBCT (mm) | Apex to facial cortex on CBCT (mm) | Pulp test at 2 minutes | Pulp test at 5 minutes | Pulp test at 10 minutes | Approximate cortical/trabecular HU values | Procedure |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient 1 | 19 M | 3.20 M | 4.6 M | + | + | + | 1,360/190 | Restoration |
| 19 D | 3.30 D | 4.70 D | + | + | + | 1,321/167 | ||
| Patient 2 | 22 | 1.35 | 5.14 | + | + | − | 801/167 | Adjacent implant |
| Patient 3 | 23 | 1.15 | 2.24 | + | + | − | 1,230/345 | Adjacent implant |
| Patient 4 | 31 | 1.67 | 3.65 | + | + | − | 1,022/442 | Extraction |
| Patient 5 | 22 | 1.83 | 6.23 | + | + | − | 940/580 | Extraction |
| 25 | 1.35 | 3.27 | + | + | − | 951/568 | Extraction | |
| 26 | 1.11 | 3.81 | + | + | − | 294/179 | Extraction | |
| 27 | 2.33 | 4.96 | + | + | − | 858/241 | Extraction | |
| Patient 6 | 22 | 1.72 | 3.01 | + | − | − | 960/444 | Extraction |
| Patient 6 | 27 | 1.76 | 2.99 | + | − | − | 824/647 | Extraction |
| Patient 7 | 21 | 2.33 | 4.44 | + | + | − | 1,253/256 | Adjacent implant |
| 22 | 2.62 | 4.47 | + | + | − | 1,405/848 | Adjacent implant | |
| 27 | 2.93 | 4.12 | + | + | − | 1,508/624 | Adjacent implant | |
| 28 | 1.74 | 4.48 | + | + | − | 1,444/477 | Adjacent implant | |
| Patient 8 | 20 | 1.60 | 6.29 | + | − | − | 487/271 | Adjacent implant |
| 21 | 2.17 | 5.18 | + | − | − | 831/203 | Adjacent implant | |
| 22 | 2.60 | 4.54 | + | + | − | 520/281 | Adjacent implant | |
| Patient 9 | 22 | 2.06 | 5.34 | + | − | − | 636/361 | Restoration |
| 27 | 2.66 | 5.11 | + | − | − | 1,328/424 | Restoration |
Notes: Each cortical thickness was measured using the CBCT. Each distance from the tooth apex to the facial aspect of the cortex was measured using the CBCT. Cortical and trabecular HU values were measured for each site. Each tooth was slated for a restoration, an extraction, or an adjacent edentulous implant. All teeth were sensate at zero start time and after 2 minutes. After 5 minutes, 14 teeth were sensate and six were insensate. After 10 minutes, all teeth were insensate except one first molar. + = sensate, − = insensate.
Abbreviations: CBCT, cone beam computerized tomography; HU, Hounsfield units; M, mesial; D, distal.
The average cortical thicknesses of each site were calculated
| Average cortical thickness (mm) – sensate at 5 minutes | Average cortical thickness (mm) – insensate at 5 minutes | Average cortical thickness (mm) – sensate at 10 minutes (one molar with two roots) | Average cortical thickness (mm) – insensate at 10 minutes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2.12 | 2.00 | 3.25 | 1.94 |
Note: The thickest cortices did not attain anesthesia.
The average apex to facial cortex distance was measured
| Average apical distance (mm) – sensate at 5 minutes | Average apical distance (mm) –insensate at 5 minutes | Average apicaldistance (mm) – sensate at 10 minutes |
|---|---|---|
| 4.33 | 4.65 | 4.65 |
Note: The position of the tooth apex from the facial aspect of the cortex did not appear to influence the attainment of anesthesia.
The HU values for each site, cortical/trabecular, were measured using the CBCT
| Average HU – sensate at 5 minutes | Average HU – insensate at 5 minutes | Average HU – sensate at 10 minutes | Average HU – insensate at 10 minutes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1,065/383 | 844/392 | 1,341/179 | 961/409 |
Note: HU measurements using the CBCT are not accurate for bone density due to technical anatomical factors.
Abbreviations: HU, Hounsfield units; CBCT, cone beam computerized tomography.