European endodontic journal · 2024
Effect of Intraligamentary Tramadol Hydrochloride on Anesthetic Success During Endodontic Management of Mandibular Molars: A Randomized Clinical Controlled Trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aggarwal Vivek, Singla Mamta, Gupta Alpa, Kumar Umesh, Saatchi Masoud
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Tramadol hydrochloride has shown local anesthetic properties similar to lidocaine, apart from a central analgesic effect. The present study evaluated the effect of the administration of tramadol alone or in addition to 2% lidocaine, as supplementary intraligamentary injections.
METHODS: One hundred and five patients, with a failed primary inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB), were randomly allocated to one of the three supplementary intraligamentary groups: 2% lidocaine with 1: 80,000 epinephrine; tramadol hydrochloride (50 mg/mL); and 2% lidocaine with 1: 80,000 epinephrine plus tramadol hydrochloride. Patients received 1.2 mL doses (0.6 mL of each root). Patients reporting pain ≤54 on Heft Parker visual analogue scale (Heft-Parker VAS), were categorized as successful anesthesia. A finger pulse oximeter was used to measure the heart rates. The anesthetic success rates, gender, and type of tooth were compared using the Pearson chi-square test. The heart rates and age were statistically evaluated using the one-way analysis of variance test. The level of significance was set at 0.05 (p=0.05).
RESULTS: The initial IANB was successful in 31% of cases. There were significant differences in the anesthetic success rates of different supplementary intraligamentary injections (χ2= 33.6, p<0.001, df=2). The 2% lidocaine-plus-tramadol resulted in significantly higher success rates than the two groups. There were no significant changes in the baseline heart rates of all groups (p>0.05).
CONCLUSION: The addition of tramadol to 2% lidocaine with 1: 80,000 epinephrine, given as supplementary intraligamentary injection, can help in achieving successful anesthesia during the endodontic management of mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis resistant to IANB injections.
METHODS: One hundred and five patients, with a failed primary inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB), were randomly allocated to one of the three supplementary intraligamentary groups: 2% lidocaine with 1: 80,000 epinephrine; tramadol hydrochloride (50 mg/mL); and 2% lidocaine with 1: 80,000 epinephrine plus tramadol hydrochloride. Patients received 1.2 mL doses (0.6 mL of each root). Patients reporting pain ≤54 on Heft Parker visual analogue scale (Heft-Parker VAS), were categorized as successful anesthesia. A finger pulse oximeter was used to measure the heart rates. The anesthetic success rates, gender, and type of tooth were compared using the Pearson chi-square test. The heart rates and age were statistically evaluated using the one-way analysis of variance test. The level of significance was set at 0.05 (p=0.05).
RESULTS: The initial IANB was successful in 31% of cases. There were significant differences in the anesthetic success rates of different supplementary intraligamentary injections (χ2= 33.6, p<0.001, df=2). The 2% lidocaine-plus-tramadol resulted in significantly higher success rates than the two groups. There were no significant changes in the baseline heart rates of all groups (p>0.05).
CONCLUSION: The addition of tramadol to 2% lidocaine with 1: 80,000 epinephrine, given as supplementary intraligamentary injection, can help in achieving successful anesthesia during the endodontic management of mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis resistant to IANB injections.