International endodontic journal · 2017
Does the volume of supplemental intraligamentary injections affect the anaesthetic success rate after a failed primary inferior alveolar nerve block? A randomized-double blind clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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 V, Singla M, Miglani S, Kohli S, Sharma V, Bhasin S S
Аннотация
AIM: To investigate the efficacy of 0.2 mL vs. 0.6 mL of 2% lidocaine when given as a supplementary intraligamentary injection after a failed inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB).
METHODOLOGY: Ninety-seven adult patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpits received an IANB and root canal treatment was initiated. Pain during treatment was recorded using a visual analogue scale (Heft-Parker VAS). Patients with unsuccessful anaesthesia (n = 78) randomly received intraligamentary injection of either 0.2 mL or 0.6 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1 : 80 000 epinephrine. Root canal treatment was reinitiated. Success after primary injection or supplementary injection was defined as no or mild pain (HP VAS score ≤54 mm) during access preparation and root canal instrumentation. Heart rate was monitored using a finger pulse oximeter. The anaesthetic success rates were analysed with Pearson chi-square test at 5% significance levels. The heart rate changes were analysed using t-tests.
RESULTS: The intraligamentary injections with 0.2 mL solution gave an anaesthetic success rate of 64%, whilst the 0.6 mL was successful in 84% of cases with failed primary IANB. (χ2 = 4.3, P = 0.03). There was no significant effect of the volume of intraligamentary injection on the change in heart rate.
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the volume of intraligamentary injection improved the success rates after a failed primary anaesthetic injection.
METHODOLOGY: Ninety-seven adult patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpits received an IANB and root canal treatment was initiated. Pain during treatment was recorded using a visual analogue scale (Heft-Parker VAS). Patients with unsuccessful anaesthesia (n = 78) randomly received intraligamentary injection of either 0.2 mL or 0.6 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1 : 80 000 epinephrine. Root canal treatment was reinitiated. Success after primary injection or supplementary injection was defined as no or mild pain (HP VAS score ≤54 mm) during access preparation and root canal instrumentation. Heart rate was monitored using a finger pulse oximeter. The anaesthetic success rates were analysed with Pearson chi-square test at 5% significance levels. The heart rate changes were analysed using t-tests.
RESULTS: The intraligamentary injections with 0.2 mL solution gave an anaesthetic success rate of 64%, whilst the 0.6 mL was successful in 84% of cases with failed primary IANB. (χ2 = 4.3, P = 0.03). There was no significant effect of the volume of intraligamentary injection on the change in heart rate.
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the volume of intraligamentary injection improved the success rates after a failed primary anaesthetic injection.