骨内注射生理盐水治疗下颌阻生第三磨牙手术移除疼痛的疗效:一项随机双盲临床试验。

Jawahar Babu S, Naveen Kumar Jayakumar, Pearlcid Siroraj
{"title":"骨内注射生理盐水治疗下颌阻生第三磨牙手术移除疼痛的疗效:一项随机双盲临床试验。","authors":"Jawahar Babu S,&nbsp;Naveen Kumar Jayakumar,&nbsp;Pearlcid Siroraj","doi":"10.17245/jdapm.2023.23.3.163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars is the most common procedure performed by oral surgeons. The procedure cannot be performed effectively without achieving profound anesthesia. During this procedure, patients may feel pain during surgical bone removal (at the cancellous level) or during splitting and luxation of the tooth, despite administration of routine nerve blocks. Administration of intraosseous (IO) lignocaine injections during third molar surgeries to provide effective anesthesia for pain alleviation has been documented. However, whether the anesthetic effect of lignocaine is the only reason for pain alleviation when administered intraosseously remains unclear. This conundrum motivated us to assess the efficacy of IO normal saline versus lignocaine injections during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of IO normal saline as a viable alternative or adjunct to lignocaine for alleviation of intraoperative pain during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized, double-blind, interventional study included 160 patients who underwent surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars and experienced pain during surgical removal of the buccal bone or sectioning and luxation of the tooth. The participants were divided into two groups: the study group, which included patients who would receive IO saline injections, and the control group, which included patients who would receive IO lignocaine injections. Patients were asked to complete a visual analog pain scale (VAPS) at baseline and after receiving the IO injections.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 160 patients included in this study, 80 received IO lignocaine (control group), whereas 80 received IO saline (study group) following randomization. The baseline VAPS score of the patients and controls was 5.71 ± 1.33 and 5.68 ± 1.21, respectively. The difference between the baseline VAPS scores of the two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference between the numbers of patients who experienced pain relief following administration of IO lignocaine (n=74) versus saline (n=69) was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference between VAPS scores measured after IO injection in both groups was not statistically significant (P >0.05) (1.05 ± 1.20 for the control group vs. 1.72 ± 1.56 for the study group).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study demonstrates that IO injection of normal saline is as effective as lignocaine in alleviating pain during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars and can be used as an effective adjunct to conventional lignocaine injection.</p>","PeriodicalId":15634,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":"23 3","pages":"163-171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d4/78/jdapm-23-163.PMC10260351.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of intraosseous saline injection for pain management during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars: a randomized double-blinded clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Jawahar Babu S,&nbsp;Naveen Kumar Jayakumar,&nbsp;Pearlcid Siroraj\",\"doi\":\"10.17245/jdapm.2023.23.3.163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars is the most common procedure performed by oral surgeons. The procedure cannot be performed effectively without achieving profound anesthesia. During this procedure, patients may feel pain during surgical bone removal (at the cancellous level) or during splitting and luxation of the tooth, despite administration of routine nerve blocks. Administration of intraosseous (IO) lignocaine injections during third molar surgeries to provide effective anesthesia for pain alleviation has been documented. However, whether the anesthetic effect of lignocaine is the only reason for pain alleviation when administered intraosseously remains unclear. This conundrum motivated us to assess the efficacy of IO normal saline versus lignocaine injections during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of IO normal saline as a viable alternative or adjunct to lignocaine for alleviation of intraoperative pain during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized, double-blind, interventional study included 160 patients who underwent surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars and experienced pain during surgical removal of the buccal bone or sectioning and luxation of the tooth. The participants were divided into two groups: the study group, which included patients who would receive IO saline injections, and the control group, which included patients who would receive IO lignocaine injections. Patients were asked to complete a visual analog pain scale (VAPS) at baseline and after receiving the IO injections.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 160 patients included in this study, 80 received IO lignocaine (control group), whereas 80 received IO saline (study group) following randomization. The baseline VAPS score of the patients and controls was 5.71 ± 1.33 and 5.68 ± 1.21, respectively. The difference between the baseline VAPS scores of the two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference between the numbers of patients who experienced pain relief following administration of IO lignocaine (n=74) versus saline (n=69) was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference between VAPS scores measured after IO injection in both groups was not statistically significant (P >0.05) (1.05 ± 1.20 for the control group vs. 1.72 ± 1.56 for the study group).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study demonstrates that IO injection of normal saline is as effective as lignocaine in alleviating pain during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars and can be used as an effective adjunct to conventional lignocaine injection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":\"23 3\",\"pages\":\"163-171\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d4/78/jdapm-23-163.PMC10260351.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.2023.23.3.163\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2023.23.3.163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:下颌阻生第三磨牙的手术拔除是口腔外科最常见的手术。如果没有深度麻醉,手术就不能有效进行。在此过程中,尽管给予常规神经阻滞治疗,患者在手术剔骨(在松质水平)或牙齿劈裂和脱位时仍可能感到疼痛。在第三磨牙手术期间,骨内注射利多卡因以提供有效的麻醉以减轻疼痛。然而,利多卡因的麻醉效果是否是骨内给药减轻疼痛的唯一原因尚不清楚。这一难题促使我们评估在手术切除下颌阻生第三磨牙时注射生理盐水与利多卡因的疗效。本研究的目的是评估生理盐水作为利多卡因的可行替代或辅助治疗在下颌阻生第三磨牙手术中减轻术中疼痛的疗效。方法:这项随机、双盲、介入性研究包括160例患者,他们接受了下颌阻生第三磨牙的手术拔除,并在手术切除颊骨或切面脱位时经历了疼痛。参与者被分为两组:研究组,包括接受IO生理盐水注射的患者;对照组,包括接受IO利多卡因注射的患者。患者被要求在基线和接受IO注射后完成视觉模拟疼痛量表(VAPS)。结果:在本研究纳入的160例患者中,随机分组后,80例患者接受IO利多卡因治疗(对照组),80例患者接受IO生理盐水治疗(研究组)。患者和对照组的VAPS基线评分分别为5.71±1.33和5.68±1.21。两组患者VAPS基线评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。静脉注射利多卡因(74例)与生理盐水(69例)后疼痛缓解的患者数量差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。两组注射IO后VAPS评分差异无统计学意义(P >0.05)(对照组为1.05±1.20,研究组为1.72±1.56)。结论:研究表明,在下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除术中注射生理盐水与利多卡因一样能有效缓解疼痛,可作为常规利多卡因注射的有效辅助手段。
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
Efficacy of intraosseous saline injection for pain management during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars: a randomized double-blinded clinical trial.

Background: Surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars is the most common procedure performed by oral surgeons. The procedure cannot be performed effectively without achieving profound anesthesia. During this procedure, patients may feel pain during surgical bone removal (at the cancellous level) or during splitting and luxation of the tooth, despite administration of routine nerve blocks. Administration of intraosseous (IO) lignocaine injections during third molar surgeries to provide effective anesthesia for pain alleviation has been documented. However, whether the anesthetic effect of lignocaine is the only reason for pain alleviation when administered intraosseously remains unclear. This conundrum motivated us to assess the efficacy of IO normal saline versus lignocaine injections during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of IO normal saline as a viable alternative or adjunct to lignocaine for alleviation of intraoperative pain during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars.

Methods: This randomized, double-blind, interventional study included 160 patients who underwent surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars and experienced pain during surgical removal of the buccal bone or sectioning and luxation of the tooth. The participants were divided into two groups: the study group, which included patients who would receive IO saline injections, and the control group, which included patients who would receive IO lignocaine injections. Patients were asked to complete a visual analog pain scale (VAPS) at baseline and after receiving the IO injections.

Results: Of the 160 patients included in this study, 80 received IO lignocaine (control group), whereas 80 received IO saline (study group) following randomization. The baseline VAPS score of the patients and controls was 5.71 ± 1.33 and 5.68 ± 1.21, respectively. The difference between the baseline VAPS scores of the two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference between the numbers of patients who experienced pain relief following administration of IO lignocaine (n=74) versus saline (n=69) was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference between VAPS scores measured after IO injection in both groups was not statistically significant (P >0.05) (1.05 ± 1.20 for the control group vs. 1.72 ± 1.56 for the study group).

Conclusion: The study demonstrates that IO injection of normal saline is as effective as lignocaine in alleviating pain during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars and can be used as an effective adjunct to conventional lignocaine injection.

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
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