阿替卡因与利多卡因下牙槽神经阻滞在下颌骨植入手术中的应用:一项随机对照试验。

Y Gülnahar, A-L Alpan, E Gülnahar
{"title":"阿替卡因与利多卡因下牙槽神经阻滞在下颌骨植入手术中的应用:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Y Gülnahar,&nbsp;A-L Alpan,&nbsp;E Gülnahar","doi":"10.4317/medoral.25475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study is to compare the effects of %4 articaine and %2 lidocaine on inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) for implant surgery in the posterior mandible.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The patients who have inserted implants in the posterior mandible were divided into 2 groups for IANB: lidocaine and articaine. VAS = visual analog scale, pain during surgery and injection, lip numbness time, mandibular canal-implant apex distance, age, gender, bone density, implant number, release incision, adjacent teeth, and duration of surgery were analyzed using t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Spearman's coefficient, and, Pearson's chi-squared test. This trial followed the recommendations of the Consort Statement for reporting randomized controlled trials.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>577 patients were included and 1185 dental implants were analyzed. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of injection and surgery VAS values (p>0.05). The lip numbness time of lidocaine was 3.06±3.22min while articaine was found to be 2.96±3.09min (p>0.05). Mandibular canal-implant apex distance was found to be 2.28±0.75mm in the articaine and 2.45±0.86mm in the lidocaine group (p<0.05). Release incision was made more in the articaine group (51/252) than in the lidocaine group (40/325) (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no difference between the %4 articaine and %2 lidocaine in terms of pain perception in posterior mandible implant applications. Both anesthetics provided adequate anesthesia for implant application.</p>","PeriodicalId":18351,"journal":{"name":"Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9985933/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Articaine versus lidocaine inferior alveolar nerve block in posterior mandible implant surgeries: a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Y Gülnahar,&nbsp;A-L Alpan,&nbsp;E Gülnahar\",\"doi\":\"10.4317/medoral.25475\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study is to compare the effects of %4 articaine and %2 lidocaine on inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) for implant surgery in the posterior mandible.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The patients who have inserted implants in the posterior mandible were divided into 2 groups for IANB: lidocaine and articaine. VAS = visual analog scale, pain during surgery and injection, lip numbness time, mandibular canal-implant apex distance, age, gender, bone density, implant number, release incision, adjacent teeth, and duration of surgery were analyzed using t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Spearman's coefficient, and, Pearson's chi-squared test. This trial followed the recommendations of the Consort Statement for reporting randomized controlled trials.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>577 patients were included and 1185 dental implants were analyzed. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of injection and surgery VAS values (p>0.05). The lip numbness time of lidocaine was 3.06±3.22min while articaine was found to be 2.96±3.09min (p>0.05). Mandibular canal-implant apex distance was found to be 2.28±0.75mm in the articaine and 2.45±0.86mm in the lidocaine group (p<0.05). Release incision was made more in the articaine group (51/252) than in the lidocaine group (40/325) (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no difference between the %4 articaine and %2 lidocaine in terms of pain perception in posterior mandible implant applications. Both anesthetics provided adequate anesthesia for implant application.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18351,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9985933/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.25475\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.25475","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究的目的是比较%4阿替卡因和%2利多卡因对下颌骨种植手术中下牙槽神经阻滞(IANB)的影响。材料和方法:将后颌骨种植体患者分为利多卡因组和阿替卡因组进行IANB治疗。采用t检验、Mann-Whitney U检验、Spearman系数、Pearson卡方检验对VAS =视觉模拟量表、术中及注射疼痛、唇麻时间、下颌管-种植体尖端距离、年龄、性别、骨密度、种植体数量、释放切口、邻牙、手术时间进行分析。该试验遵循Consort声明中关于报告随机对照试验的建议。结果:共纳入577例患者,共分析种植体1185颗。两组注射、手术VAS评分差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。利多卡因组唇部麻木时间为3.06±3.22min,阿替卡因组唇部麻木时间为2.96±3.09min (p>0.05)。结论:%4阿替卡因组与%2利多卡因组在下颌后种植体应用时的疼痛感觉无显著差异。结论:%4阿替卡因组与%2利多卡因组在下颌后种植体应用时的疼痛感觉无显著差异。两种麻醉药均为植入物的应用提供了充分的麻醉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Articaine versus lidocaine inferior alveolar nerve block in posterior mandible implant surgeries: a randomized controlled trial.

Background: The aim of this study is to compare the effects of %4 articaine and %2 lidocaine on inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) for implant surgery in the posterior mandible.

Material and methods: The patients who have inserted implants in the posterior mandible were divided into 2 groups for IANB: lidocaine and articaine. VAS = visual analog scale, pain during surgery and injection, lip numbness time, mandibular canal-implant apex distance, age, gender, bone density, implant number, release incision, adjacent teeth, and duration of surgery were analyzed using t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Spearman's coefficient, and, Pearson's chi-squared test. This trial followed the recommendations of the Consort Statement for reporting randomized controlled trials.

Results: 577 patients were included and 1185 dental implants were analyzed. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of injection and surgery VAS values (p>0.05). The lip numbness time of lidocaine was 3.06±3.22min while articaine was found to be 2.96±3.09min (p>0.05). Mandibular canal-implant apex distance was found to be 2.28±0.75mm in the articaine and 2.45±0.86mm in the lidocaine group (p<0.05). Release incision was made more in the articaine group (51/252) than in the lidocaine group (40/325) (p<0.05).

Conclusions: There was no difference between the %4 articaine and %2 lidocaine in terms of pain perception in posterior mandible implant applications. Both anesthetics provided adequate anesthesia for implant application.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: 1. Oral Medicine and Pathology: Clinicopathological as well as medical or surgical management aspects of diseases affecting oral mucosa, salivary glands, maxillary bones, as well as orofacial neurological disorders, and systemic conditions with an impact on the oral cavity. 2. Oral Surgery: Surgical management aspects of diseases affecting oral mucosa, salivary glands, maxillary bones, teeth, implants, oral surgical procedures. Surgical management of diseases affecting head and neck areas. 3. Medically compromised patients in Dentistry: Articles discussing medical problems in Odontology will also be included, with a special focus on the clinico-odontological management of medically compromised patients, and considerations regarding high-risk or disabled patients. 4. Implantology 5. Periodontology
期刊最新文献
Antibiotic prescribing patterns in the placement of dental implants in Europe: A systematic review of survey-based studies. Single ulcers on the tongue dorsum: differential diagnosis between paracoccidioidomycosis and squamous cell carcinoma. Effectiveness of intra-articular infiltration of platelet concentrates for the treatment of painful joint disorders in the temporomandibular joint: a systematic review. Frequency of BRAF V600E immunoexpression in ameloblastomas: a multi-institutional analysis of 86 cases in Latin America and comprehensive review of the literature. Comparison of a daily and alternate-day photobiomodulation protocol in the prevention of oral mucositis in patients undergoing radiochemotherapy for oral cancer: a triple-blind, controlled clinical 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