Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2023
Comparative Evaluation of Buccal Infiltration Technique with Buccal Plus Palatal Infiltration Technique Using 4% Articaine in Patients with Irreversible Pulpitis of Maxillary 1st Molars: A Prospective, Randomized, In-Vivo Study.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Syed Gufaran A, Shrivastava Anuprabha, Sisodia Suruchi, Sisodiya Bhanupratap, Gupta Kanishk, Sapri Ahmed Saaduddin, AboShetaih Mohamed, Alghamdi Sulaiman Ibrahim S
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the buccal infiltration (BI) technique with the buccal plus palatal infiltration (BPI) technique using 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine.
METHODS: A total of 50 adult patients received BI, and the other 50 adult patients received BPI with 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. During RCT procedure, when the patient experienced pain, the treatment was stopped and the extent of the procedure was documented. When a patient reported "no pain" (0 mm) or "weak/mild pain" (0 <= 54 mm), the anesthesia was considered successful.
RESULTS: Statistical analysis using unpaired t-test showed that the mean pain scores in both groups were comparable.
CONCLUSION: The pain scores in both groups were comparable, but BI is better than BPI as a painful and traumatic palatal injection was avoided.
METHODS: A total of 50 adult patients received BI, and the other 50 adult patients received BPI with 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. During RCT procedure, when the patient experienced pain, the treatment was stopped and the extent of the procedure was documented. When a patient reported "no pain" (0 mm) or "weak/mild pain" (0 <= 54 mm), the anesthesia was considered successful.
RESULTS: Statistical analysis using unpaired t-test showed that the mean pain scores in both groups were comparable.
CONCLUSION: The pain scores in both groups were comparable, but BI is better than BPI as a painful and traumatic palatal injection was avoided.