Change in pain threshold by meperidine, naproxen sodium, and acetaminophen as determined by electric pulp testing.
(1/33)
The purpose of this study was to compare changes in pain threshold caused by meperidine, naproxen sodium, acetaminophen, and placebo. The change in pain threshold was measured by electric pulp testing. Acetaminophen elevated the pain threshold statistically significantly. Clinically, however, the superiority of acetaminophen is questionable. No elevation of the pain threshold occurred with narcotic drugs or with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: our research shows that the electric pulp tests of patients who have taken these drugs preoperatively will have results similar to those of patients who have taken no drugs. We question the philosophy of administering these drugs for change in pain threshold at the levels used here preoperatively. (+info)
Anesthetic efficacy of a repeated intraosseous injection given 30 min following an inferior alveolar nerve block/intraosseous injection.
(2/33)
To determine whether a repeated intraosseous (IO) injection would increase or prolong pulpal anesthesia, we measured the degree of anesthesia obtained by a repeated IO injection given 30 min following a combination inferior alveolar nerve block/intraosseous injection (IAN/IO) in mandibular second premolars and in first and second molars. Using a repeated-measures design, we randomly assigned 38 subjects to receive two combinations of injections at two separate appointments. The combinations were an IAN/IO injection followed approximately 30 min later by another IO injection of 0.9 ml of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and a combination IAN/IO injection followed approximately 30 min later by a mock IO injection. The second premolar, first molar, and second molar were blindly tested with an Analytic Technology pulp tester at 2-min cycles for 120 min postinjection. Anesthesia was considered successful when two consecutive readings of 80 were obtained. One hundred percent of the subjects had lip numbness with IAN/IO and with IAN/IO plus repeated IO techniques. Rates of anesthetic success for the IAN/IO and for the IAN/IO plus repeated IO injection, respectively, were 100% and 97% for the second premolar, 95% and 95% for the first molar, and 87% and 87% for the second molar. The repeated IO injection increased pulpal anesthesia for approximately 14 min in the second premolar and for 6 min in the first molar, but no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) were shown. In conclusion, the repeated IO injection of 0.9 ml of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine given 30 min following a combination IAN/IO injection did not significantly increase pulpal anesthesia in mandibular second premolars or in first and second molars. (+info)
Anesthetic efficacy of a combination of hyaluronidase and lidocaine with epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve blocks.
(3/33)
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to determine the anesthetic efficacy of a buffered lidocaine with epinephrine solution compared to a combination buffered lidocaine with epinephrine plus hyaluronidase solution in inferior alveolar nerve blocks. Thirty subjects randomly received an inferior alveolar nerve block using 1 of the 2 solutions at 2 separate appointments using a repeated-measures design. Mandibular anterior and posterior teeth were blindly pulp tested at 4-minute cycles for 60 minutes postinjection. No response from the subject to the maximum output (80 reading) of the pulp tester was used as the criterion for pulpal anesthesia. Anesthesia was considered successful when 2 consecutive readings of 80 were obtained. A postoperative survey was used to measure pain and trismus. The results demonstrated 100% of the subjects had profound lip numbness with both solutions for inferior alveolar nerve blocks. The anesthetic success rates for individual teeth ranged from 20 to 80%. There were no significant differences (P > .05) between the 2 solutions. However, the combination lidocaine/hyaluronidase solution resulted in a significant increase in postoperative pain and trismus. It was concluded that adding hyaluronidase to a buffered lidocaine solution with epinephrine did not statistically increase the incidence of pulpal anesthesia in inferior alveolar nerve blocks and, because of its potential tissue damaging effect, it should not be added to local anesthetic solutions for inferior alveolar nerve blocks. (+info)
Differential diagnosis and therapeutic approach to periapical cysts in daily dental practice.
(4/33)
The diagnosis and therapeutic approach to periapical cysts is an extremely controversial concern for dentists. Furthermore, as this complaint represents the most frequent cystic lesion of the maxilla, together with the fact that its differential diagnosis with chronic apical periodontitis presents special difficulty, the question takes on even greater importance. The purpose of this article is to assess the validity of the various diagnostic techniques used to differentiate between both pathologies and make a critical analysis of the controversy surrounding the therapeutic approach to suspected periapical cysts through non-surgical and follow-up treatment, or surgical enucleation and histopathological analysis. (+info)
A closer look at diagnosis in clinical dental practice: part 4. Effectiveness of nonradiographic diagnostic procedures and devices in dental practice.
(5/33)
This article, the fourth in a series, examines nonradiographic procedures and devices such as standard clinical and visual examination, apex locators, vitality testers and colour shade guides in light of the tools described in the first 2 articles in the series. A variety of nonradiographic indices and scales are used in detecting periodontal disease and monitoring and assessing its treatment. The reliability of these diagnostic procedures directly affects treatment success, decisions to initiate more aggressive clinical interventions, and the ability to make an informed prognosis about the course of the disease. However, in many instances, the dependability of the measurements remains to be established. (+info)
Anesthetic efficacy of an infiltration in mandibular anterior teeth following an inferior alveolar nerve block.
(6/33)
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, blinded study was to measure the degree of pulpal anesthesia obtained with an inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block followed by an infiltration in mandibular anterior teeth. Through use of a repeated-measures design, 40 patients randomly received 3 injection combinations at 3 separate appointments: an IAN block followed by a mock lingual infiltration and a mock labial infiltration, an IAN block followed by a mock lingual infiltration and a labial infiltration, and an IAN block followed by a mock labial infiltration and a lingual infiltration. Each IAN block used 3.6 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine, and each infiltration used 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine administered over the lateral incisor apex. Mandibular anterior teeth were blindly pulp tested at 2-minute cycles for 60 minutes following the IAN-infiltration injections. No response from the patient to the maximum output (80 reading) of the pulp tester was used as the criterion for pulpal anesthesia. Anesthesia was considered successful when 2 consecutive 80 readings were obtained within 15 minutes and the 80 reading was sustained for 60 minutes. Anesthesia was considered a failure if 2 consecutive 80 readings were not obtained during the 60 minutes. The results of this study showed that 100% of the patients had lip numbness with all IAN blocks. For the lateral incisor, the success rate of the IAN block alone was 40% and the failure rate was 30%. For the IAN block plus labial infiltration, the success rate was 62% and the failure rate was 12% for the lateral incisor. There was a significant difference (P < .05) between the IAN block alone and the IAN block plus labial infiltration. In conclusion, a labial infiltration, over the lateral incisor apex, of 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine following an IAN block significantly improved pulpal anesthesia for the lateral incisor compared with the IAN block alone. (+info)
Anesthetic efficacy of the anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) injection.
(7/33)
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, blinded study was to determine the anesthetic efficacy of the anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) injection using the computer-assisted Wand Plus injection system versus a conventional syringe. The authors, using a crossover design, randomly administered in a blind manner 2 AMSA injections utilizing the computer-assisted injection system and a conventional syringe to 40 subjects during 2 separate appointments. A pulp tester was used to test for anesthesia, in 4-minute cycles for 60 minutes, of the central and lateral incisors, canine, and first and second premolars. Anesthesia was considered successful when 2 consecutive no responses (80 readings) with the pulp tester were obtained. For all teeth, except the central incisor, the use of the computer-assisted injection system was significantly (P < .05) more likely to result in pulpal anesthesia than the use of the conventional syringe technique. For the computer-assisted injection system, successful pulpal anesthesia ranged from 35 to 58%, and for the conventional syringe, successful pulpal anesthesia ranged from 20 to 42%. For both techniques, the onset of pulpal anesthesia was slow, and duration of pulpal anesthesia declined steadily over 60 minutes. We conclude that although the AMSA injection using the computer-assisted injection system was more successful than the conventional syringe technique, the rather modest to low success rates, slow onset, and declining duration of pulpal anesthesia over 60 minutes would not ensure predictable pulpal anesthesia from the second premolar to the central incisor. (+info)
The role of temperature in the action of mepivacaine.
(8/33)
The role of temperature in the action of local anesthetics was studied in 20 healthy young volunteers with plain 3% mepivacaine injected periapically twice in their maxillary first premolar, the first time with the solution at a temperature of 20 degrees C and the second time at 4 degrees C. The pulpal response was measured with a pulp tester every minute. The onset of pulp anesthesia was found to be of no statistical difference between 20 degrees C and 4 degrees C. On the other hand, mepivacaine at a temperature of 4 degrees C was found to have a statistically significant longer duration of action. Our conclusion is that the drop in temperature of mepivacaine from 20 degrees C to 4 degrees C provides a longer duration of pulpal anesthesia. (+info)