Efficacy of a conventional inferior alveolar nerve block compared to the Vazirani–Akinosi and Gow-Gates techniques for mandibular anesthesia

Rishabh Shah, P. Kalia, B. Dayanithi, S. Gulia, Rishabh Bhanot, Sasikanth Challari
{"title":"Efficacy of a conventional inferior alveolar nerve block compared to the Vazirani–Akinosi and Gow-Gates techniques for mandibular anesthesia","authors":"Rishabh Shah, P. Kalia, B. Dayanithi, S. Gulia, Rishabh Bhanot, Sasikanth Challari","doi":"10.4103/SDJ.SDJ_47_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The conventional inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) cannot be employed in clinical scenarios with trismus. In addition, it is a blind procedure, so failure to follow the ideal anatomical landmarks and improper positioning of the needle may result in anesthesia failure. This study evaluated whether the Vazirani–Akinosi (VA) and Gow-Gates (GG) techniques for mandibular anesthesia have superior outcomes in the form of fewer positive aspirations and rapid onset of action, as well as better anesthetic attainment. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy and associated complications of a conventional IANB compared to the VA and GG techniques. Method: The study involved 300 patients divided randomly into three groups of 100 patients each. Group I received mandibular anesthesia through the GG technique, Group II received mandibular anesthesia through the VA technique, and Group III received mandibular anesthesia through a conventional IANB. The onset of action, incidence of positive aspiration, and success of the anesthetic technique were assessed in all patients. Result: The Group II patients showed superior anesthetic success (97%) that was significantly different from the results of Groups I and III (P = 0.0241). The mean value of the onset of anesthesia was longer in Group I than in the other two groups. A significant difference was seen between the GG and VA techniques (P = 0.0001*) and between the GG and conventional IANB techniques (P = 0.0001*). Conclusion: The VA technique is considerably superior to either the GG or the conventional IANB techniques in terms of the onset of action and anesthesia success. Positive aspirations are encountered relatively more frequently with the conventional IANB technique.","PeriodicalId":32049,"journal":{"name":"Scientific Dental Journal","volume":"5 1","pages":"20 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/SDJ.SDJ_47_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The conventional inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) cannot be employed in clinical scenarios with trismus. In addition, it is a blind procedure, so failure to follow the ideal anatomical landmarks and improper positioning of the needle may result in anesthesia failure. This study evaluated whether the Vazirani–Akinosi (VA) and Gow-Gates (GG) techniques for mandibular anesthesia have superior outcomes in the form of fewer positive aspirations and rapid onset of action, as well as better anesthetic attainment. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy and associated complications of a conventional IANB compared to the VA and GG techniques. Method: The study involved 300 patients divided randomly into three groups of 100 patients each. Group I received mandibular anesthesia through the GG technique, Group II received mandibular anesthesia through the VA technique, and Group III received mandibular anesthesia through a conventional IANB. The onset of action, incidence of positive aspiration, and success of the anesthetic technique were assessed in all patients. Result: The Group II patients showed superior anesthetic success (97%) that was significantly different from the results of Groups I and III (P = 0.0241). The mean value of the onset of anesthesia was longer in Group I than in the other two groups. A significant difference was seen between the GG and VA techniques (P = 0.0001*) and between the GG and conventional IANB techniques (P = 0.0001*). Conclusion: The VA technique is considerably superior to either the GG or the conventional IANB techniques in terms of the onset of action and anesthesia success. Positive aspirations are encountered relatively more frequently with the conventional IANB technique.
传统下牙槽神经阻滞与Vazirani-Akinosi和Gow-Gates技术在下颌麻醉中的疗效比较
背景:传统的下牙槽神经阻滞(IANB)不能用于临床情况下的三体。此外,这是一种盲目的手术,因此未能遵循理想的解剖标志和针头定位不当可能导致麻醉失败。本研究评估了Vazirani-Akinosi(VA)和Gow-Gates(GG)下颌麻醉技术是否具有更好的结果,即更少的积极愿望和快速起效,以及更好的麻醉效果。目的:本研究的目的是评估传统IANB与VA和GG技术相比的麻醉效果和相关并发症。方法:该研究涉及300名患者,随机分为三组,每组100名患者。第一组通过GG技术进行下颌麻醉,第二组通过VA技术进行下颌麻,第三组通过常规IANB进行下颌麻。对所有患者的作用开始、阳性抽吸发生率和麻醉技术的成功率进行了评估。结果:第二组患者麻醉成功率为97%,与第一组和第三组的结果有显著差异(P=0.0241)。第一组的平均麻醉开始时间比其他两组长。GG和VA技术之间(P=0.001*)以及GG和传统IANB技术之间(P=0.001*)存在显著差异。结论:就动作开始和麻醉成功率而言,VA技术明显优于GG或传统IANB。在传统的IANB技术中,积极的愿望遇到的频率相对更高。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信