Assessment of the effect of premedication on the success of inferior alveolar nerve block in tobacco chewing patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized control trial.

Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Simith Yadav, Amit Kumar, Harmurti Singh, Hena Rahman, Madan Mohan Niranjan, Manika Jindal Mittel, Mohit Wadhawan
{"title":"Assessment of the effect of premedication on the success of inferior alveolar nerve block in tobacco chewing patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized control trial.","authors":"Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Simith Yadav, Amit Kumar, Harmurti Singh, Hena Rahman, Madan Mohan Niranjan, Manika Jindal Mittel, Mohit Wadhawan","doi":"10.17245/jdapm.2024.24.5.351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of oral premedication with ibuprofen on the anesthetic efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) using 2% lignocaine and 1:100000 epinephrine in tobacco-chewing (TC) and non-tobacco-chewing (NTC) patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (SIP) during nonsurgical endodontic intervention (NEI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter, prospective, double-blind, two-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial involving 160 patients was conducted for a period of 9 months. The patients were classified into the study (TC patients) and control (NTC patients) groups, which were subdivided into two subgroups 1 hour before the procedure based on oral premedication with tab ibuprofen 600 mg. Nicotine dependence was assessed using the Modified Fagerstrom Tolerance Nicotine Scale. Patients were administered an IANB injection of 2% lignocaine containing epinephrine 1:100000 after premedication. Pulpal anesthesia before NEI was confirmed using electric pulp testing and cold spraying. Patients rated their pain on the 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) during NEI thrice at the dentin, pulp, and instrumentation levels. No pain at each level indicated the success of anesthesia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The success and failure rates did not differ between the premedication and non-premedication subgroups in the TC or NTC groups (P > 0.05). However, the success rate was higher in the premedication subgroup of the NTC group (52.5%) than in the TC group (45%). Most patients with premedication experienced failure at the instrumentation level, whereas patients in the non-premedication group experienced pain at the dentin level. Failure rates of IANB did not differ significantly at different levels between the groups (P > 0.05). The mean VAS scores differed significantly at the dentin level in both groups, with lower values in the premedication group (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The efficacy of ibuprofen premedication with IANB during NEI did not differ significantly between the TC and NTC patients with SIP. The effect of premedication was more significant in the NTC group than in the TC group. A causal relationship between nicotine consumption and the success of premedication could not be established, and further studies are required to validate the results of the present study.</p>","PeriodicalId":94330,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine","volume":"24 5","pages":"351-360"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11471341/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2024.24.5.351","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of oral premedication with ibuprofen on the anesthetic efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) using 2% lignocaine and 1:100000 epinephrine in tobacco-chewing (TC) and non-tobacco-chewing (NTC) patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (SIP) during nonsurgical endodontic intervention (NEI).

Methods: This multicenter, prospective, double-blind, two-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial involving 160 patients was conducted for a period of 9 months. The patients were classified into the study (TC patients) and control (NTC patients) groups, which were subdivided into two subgroups 1 hour before the procedure based on oral premedication with tab ibuprofen 600 mg. Nicotine dependence was assessed using the Modified Fagerstrom Tolerance Nicotine Scale. Patients were administered an IANB injection of 2% lignocaine containing epinephrine 1:100000 after premedication. Pulpal anesthesia before NEI was confirmed using electric pulp testing and cold spraying. Patients rated their pain on the 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) during NEI thrice at the dentin, pulp, and instrumentation levels. No pain at each level indicated the success of anesthesia.

Results: The success and failure rates did not differ between the premedication and non-premedication subgroups in the TC or NTC groups (P > 0.05). However, the success rate was higher in the premedication subgroup of the NTC group (52.5%) than in the TC group (45%). Most patients with premedication experienced failure at the instrumentation level, whereas patients in the non-premedication group experienced pain at the dentin level. Failure rates of IANB did not differ significantly at different levels between the groups (P > 0.05). The mean VAS scores differed significantly at the dentin level in both groups, with lower values in the premedication group (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: The efficacy of ibuprofen premedication with IANB during NEI did not differ significantly between the TC and NTC patients with SIP. The effect of premedication was more significant in the NTC group than in the TC group. A causal relationship between nicotine consumption and the success of premedication could not be established, and further studies are required to validate the results of the present study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
咀嚼烟草的症状性不可逆牙髓炎患者下牙槽神经阻滞术前用药对成功率的影响评估:随机对照试验。
研究背景本研究旨在评估和比较在非手术根管治疗(NEI)过程中,使用2%木质素卡因和1:100000肾上腺素对咀嚼烟草(TC)和不咀嚼烟草(NTC)的症状性不可逆牙髓炎(SIP)患者进行下牙槽神经阻滞(IANB)的麻醉效果:这项多中心、前瞻性、双盲、双臂平行组随机对照试验涉及 160 名患者,为期 9 个月。患者被分为研究组(TC 患者)和对照组(NTC 患者),根据口服布洛芬 600 毫克片剂的预处理情况,在手术前 1 小时将研究组和对照组细分为两个亚组。尼古丁依赖性采用改良法格斯托姆尼古丁耐受量表进行评估。预处理后,为患者注射含肾上腺素1:100000的2%木质素注射液。使用电牙髓测试和冷喷雾法确认患者在进行 NEI 前的牙髓麻醉。在牙本质、牙髓和器械水平上,患者用 10 点视觉模拟量表(VAS)对 NEI 期间的疼痛进行三次评分。每个层面无疼痛表示麻醉成功:在 TC 组和 NTC 组中,预先用药和不预先用药亚组的成功率和失败率没有差异(P > 0.05)。不过,NTC 组预先用药亚组的成功率(52.5%)高于 TC 组(45%)。大多数预先用药的患者在器械层面出现失败,而未预先用药组的患者在牙本质层面出现疼痛。IANB 的失败率在组间不同水平上没有显著差异(P > 0.05)。两组患者牙本质水平的平均VAS评分有显著差异,预处理组的评分较低(P < 0.05):结论:在NEI期间使用布洛芬和IANB进行预处理的疗效在SIP的TC和NTC患者之间没有明显差异。NTC组的预处理效果比TC组更显著。尼古丁摄入量与预处理成功与否之间的因果关系无法确定,因此需要进一步研究来验证本研究的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analgesic efficiency of dexketoprofen trometamol in third molar surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Assessment of the effect of premedication on the success of inferior alveolar nerve block in tobacco chewing patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized control trial. Cuff tear of endotracheal tube induced by a palatal orthodontic device during nasotracheal intubation: a case report. Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy as an adjunct to pain management during dental extraction in children - a randomized control trial. Photobiomodulation by soft laser irradiation with and without ibuprofen improves success rate of inferior alveolar nerve block using 2% lignocaine with adrenaline in symptomatic irreversible pulpitis of mandibular molar teeth: a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1