{"title":"A comparative evaluation of landmark versus modified technique of superficial cervical plexus nerve block in the maxillofacial surgical practice.","authors":"Sneha Rathee, Vikas Dhupar, Francis Akkara","doi":"10.1007/s10006-025-01389-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to compare two techniques for administering superficial cervical plexus block (SCPB) in maxillofacial surgery: the landmark technique and the modified technique proposed by Hadzic. The research explores whether the modified technique improves precision, accelerates anesthetic onset, and enhances patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective, single-blinded, randomized clinical study was conducted on 35 patients undergoing maxillofacial surgical procedures at the Goa Dental College and Hospital. Patients were divided into two groups: Group A received SCPB using the landmark technique, and Group B received the modified technique. Both groups underwent additional inferior alveolar and buccal nerve blocks. Key variables measured included time to anesthetic onset, pain levels using the visual analogue scale (VAS), patient comfort, and intraoperative anesthetic requirements. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22, employing the Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The modified technique demonstrated a significantly shorter mean onset time of anesthesia (4.66 ± 1.27 min) compared to the landmark method (11.72 ± 3.78 min; p < 0.001). Postoperative pain scores after 10 min were significantly lower in the modified group (p < 0.001). Both groups reported high patient comfort, with minimal complications observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, the superficial cervical plexus block is safe and effective for oral and maxillofacial surgeries, providing good anesthesia for the jaw and neck. While generally sufficient, deeper anesthesia may be required for some procedures. Combined with a mandibular nerve block, it offers a reliable alternative to general anesthesia. However, a larger, more diverse sample is needed to evaluate its efficacy across procedures.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":47251,"journal":{"name":"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg","volume":"29 1","pages":"92"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-025-01389-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to compare two techniques for administering superficial cervical plexus block (SCPB) in maxillofacial surgery: the landmark technique and the modified technique proposed by Hadzic. The research explores whether the modified technique improves precision, accelerates anesthetic onset, and enhances patient outcomes.
Methods: A prospective, single-blinded, randomized clinical study was conducted on 35 patients undergoing maxillofacial surgical procedures at the Goa Dental College and Hospital. Patients were divided into two groups: Group A received SCPB using the landmark technique, and Group B received the modified technique. Both groups underwent additional inferior alveolar and buccal nerve blocks. Key variables measured included time to anesthetic onset, pain levels using the visual analogue scale (VAS), patient comfort, and intraoperative anesthetic requirements. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22, employing the Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
Results: The modified technique demonstrated a significantly shorter mean onset time of anesthesia (4.66 ± 1.27 min) compared to the landmark method (11.72 ± 3.78 min; p < 0.001). Postoperative pain scores after 10 min were significantly lower in the modified group (p < 0.001). Both groups reported high patient comfort, with minimal complications observed.
Conclusion: In conclusion, the superficial cervical plexus block is safe and effective for oral and maxillofacial surgeries, providing good anesthesia for the jaw and neck. While generally sufficient, deeper anesthesia may be required for some procedures. Combined with a mandibular nerve block, it offers a reliable alternative to general anesthesia. However, a larger, more diverse sample is needed to evaluate its efficacy across procedures.
期刊介绍:
Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery founded as Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie is a peer-reviewed online journal. It is designed for clinicians as well as researchers.The quarterly journal offers comprehensive coverage of new techniques, important developments and innovative ideas in oral and maxillofacial surgery and interdisciplinary aspects of cranial, facial and oral diseases and their management. The journal publishes papers of the highest scientific merit and widest possible scope on work in oral and maxillofacial surgery as well as supporting specialties. Practice-oriented articles help improve the methods used in oral and maxillofacial surgery.Every aspect of oral and maxillofacial surgery is fully covered through a range of invited review articles, clinical and research articles, technical notes, abstracts, and case reports. Specific topics are: aesthetic facial surgery, clinical pathology, computer-assisted surgery, congenital and craniofacial deformities, dentoalveolar surgery, head and neck oncology, implant dentistry, oral medicine, orthognathic surgery, reconstructive surgery, skull base surgery, TMJ and trauma.Time-limited reviewing and electronic processing allow to publish articles as fast as possible. Accepted articles are rapidly accessible online.Clinical studies submitted for publication have to include a declaration that they have been approved by an ethical committee according to the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki 1964 (last amendment during the 52nd World Medical Association General Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, October 2000). Experimental animal studies have to be carried out according to the principles of laboratory animal care (NIH publication No 86-23, revised 1985).