Does the presence and amount of epinephrine in 2% lidocaine affect its anesthetic efficacy in the management of symptomatic maxillary molars with irreversible pulpitis?

Mamta Singla, Megha Gugnani, Mandeep S Grewal, Umesh Kumar, Vivek Aggarwal
{"title":"Does the presence and amount of epinephrine in 2% lidocaine affect its anesthetic efficacy in the management of symptomatic maxillary molars with irreversible pulpitis?","authors":"Mamta Singla,&nbsp;Megha Gugnani,&nbsp;Mandeep S Grewal,&nbsp;Umesh Kumar,&nbsp;Vivek Aggarwal","doi":"10.17245/jdapm.2022.22.1.39","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This was a randomized controlled clinical trial that aimed to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of 2% lidocaine combined with different concentrations of epinephrine (plain, 1:200,000 and 1:80,000) during endodontic treatment of maxillary molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The trial included 144 adult patients who were randomly allocated to three treatment groups. All patients received buccal-plus-palatal infiltration. After 10 min, pulp sensibility testing was performed using an electric pulp test (EPT). If a tooth responded positively, anesthesia was considered to have failed. In the case of a negative EPT response, endodontic access was initiated under rubber dam isolation. The success of anesthesia was defined as having a pain score less than 55 on the Heft Parker visual analog scale (HP VAS), which was categorized as 'no pain' or 'faint/weak/mild' pain on the HP VAS. Baseline pre-injection and post-injection maximum heart rates were recorded. The Pearson chi-square test was used to analyze the anesthetic success rates at 5% significance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Plain 2% lidocaine and 2% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine and 1:80,000 epinephrine had anesthetic success rates of 18.75%, 72.9%, and 82.3%, respectively. Statistical analysis indicated significant differences between the groups (P < 0.001, χ<sup>2</sup> = 47.5, df = 2). The maximum heart rate increase was seen with 2% lidocaine solution with epinephrine.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adding epinephrine to 2% lidocaine significantly improves its anesthetic success rates during the root canal treatment of maxillary molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.</p>","PeriodicalId":15634,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":"22 1","pages":"39-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/80/f6/jdapm-22-39.PMC8814729.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2022.22.1.39","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: This was a randomized controlled clinical trial that aimed to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of 2% lidocaine combined with different concentrations of epinephrine (plain, 1:200,000 and 1:80,000) during endodontic treatment of maxillary molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.

Methods: The trial included 144 adult patients who were randomly allocated to three treatment groups. All patients received buccal-plus-palatal infiltration. After 10 min, pulp sensibility testing was performed using an electric pulp test (EPT). If a tooth responded positively, anesthesia was considered to have failed. In the case of a negative EPT response, endodontic access was initiated under rubber dam isolation. The success of anesthesia was defined as having a pain score less than 55 on the Heft Parker visual analog scale (HP VAS), which was categorized as 'no pain' or 'faint/weak/mild' pain on the HP VAS. Baseline pre-injection and post-injection maximum heart rates were recorded. The Pearson chi-square test was used to analyze the anesthetic success rates at 5% significance.

Results: Plain 2% lidocaine and 2% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine and 1:80,000 epinephrine had anesthetic success rates of 18.75%, 72.9%, and 82.3%, respectively. Statistical analysis indicated significant differences between the groups (P < 0.001, χ2 = 47.5, df = 2). The maximum heart rate increase was seen with 2% lidocaine solution with epinephrine.

Conclusion: Adding epinephrine to 2% lidocaine significantly improves its anesthetic success rates during the root canal treatment of maxillary molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
2%利多卡因中肾上腺素的存在和用量是否影响其治疗症状性上颌磨牙不可逆性牙髓炎的麻醉效果?
背景:本研究是一项随机对照临床试验,旨在评价2%利多卡因联合不同浓度肾上腺素(普通、1:20万、1:8万)治疗上颌磨牙症状不可逆性牙髓炎的麻醉效果。方法:144例成人患者随机分为3个治疗组。所有患者均接受颊腭浸润。10分钟后,采用电浆测试(EPT)进行牙髓敏感性测试。如果牙齿反应积极,则认为麻醉失败。在负EPT反应的情况下,在橡胶坝隔离下启动根管通道。麻醉成功的定义是在Heft Parker视觉模拟量表(HP VAS)上疼痛评分低于55分,在HP VAS上分为“无疼痛”或“微弱/弱/轻度”疼痛。记录注射前和注射后的基线最大心率。采用Pearson卡方检验分析麻醉成功率,显著性为5%。结果:2%利多卡因纯麻醉和2%利多卡因加1:20万、1:8万肾上腺素麻醉成功率分别为18.75%、72.9%、82.3%。统计学分析显示两组间差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001, χ2 = 47.5, df = 2)。2%利多卡因溶液与肾上腺素混合时,心率增加幅度最大。结论:2%利多卡因中加入肾上腺素可显著提高上颌磨牙根管治疗症状性不可逆性牙髓炎的麻醉成功率。
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
Assessment of Maternal Mortality Rate and Associated Risk Factors at Tertiary Hospitals in Burundi (2020-2021): A retrospective Cohort Study An Unusual Case of Huge Cervical Fibroid with Tubercular Aortic Nodes in Case of Aortic Occlusion Psychopathological Characteristics in Patients with Digestive Problems: A Comparative Analysis with a Healthy Control Group The Role of Patients’ Advocacy Groups to Reduce Headache Pain in the European Union: from the Italian Case History to the European Migraine Action Plan Building MODFLOW Model in ModelMuse GUI For Bari Doab
×
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