下颌磨牙颊面浸润中的 2% 缓冲阿替卡因:随机三盲临床试验。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Brazilian oral research Pub Date : 2023-12-15 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2023.vol37.0132
Sandro Alexander Lévano Loayza, Thomas Barbin, Victor Augusto Benedicto Dos Santos, Francisco Carlos Groppo, Klinger de Souza Amorim, Daniel Felipe Fernandes Paiva, Sidney Raimundo Figueroba
{"title":"下颌磨牙颊面浸润中的 2% 缓冲阿替卡因:随机三盲临床试验。","authors":"Sandro Alexander Lévano Loayza, Thomas Barbin, Victor Augusto Benedicto Dos Santos, Francisco Carlos Groppo, Klinger de Souza Amorim, Daniel Felipe Fernandes Paiva, Sidney Raimundo Figueroba","doi":"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2023.vol37.0132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This crossover study aimed to compare the anesthetic effects of buffered 2% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine with that of non-buffered 4% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine. Forty-seven volunteers were administered two doses of anesthesia in the buccal region of the second mandibular molars in two sessions using 1.8 mL of different local anesthetic solutions. The onset time and duration of pulp anesthesia, soft tissue pressure pain threshold, and the score of pain on puncture and burning during injection were evaluated. The operator, volunteers, and statistician were blinded. There were no significant differences in the parameters: onset of soft tissue anesthesia (p = 0.80), duration of soft tissue anesthesia (p = 0.10), onset of pulpal anesthesia in the second (p = 0.28) and first molars (p = 0.45), duration of pulp anesthesia of the second (p = 0.60) and first molars (p = 0.30), pain during puncture (p = 0.82) and injection (p = 0.80). No significant adverse events were observed. Buffered 2% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine did not differ from non-buffered 4% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine considering anesthetic success, safety, onset, duration of anesthesia, and pain on injection.</p>","PeriodicalId":9240,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian oral research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Buffered 2% articaine in buccal infiltration of mandibular molars: a randomized triple-blind clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Sandro Alexander Lévano Loayza, Thomas Barbin, Victor Augusto Benedicto Dos Santos, Francisco Carlos Groppo, Klinger de Souza Amorim, Daniel Felipe Fernandes Paiva, Sidney Raimundo Figueroba\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2023.vol37.0132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This crossover study aimed to compare the anesthetic effects of buffered 2% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine with that of non-buffered 4% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine. Forty-seven volunteers were administered two doses of anesthesia in the buccal region of the second mandibular molars in two sessions using 1.8 mL of different local anesthetic solutions. The onset time and duration of pulp anesthesia, soft tissue pressure pain threshold, and the score of pain on puncture and burning during injection were evaluated. The operator, volunteers, and statistician were blinded. There were no significant differences in the parameters: onset of soft tissue anesthesia (p = 0.80), duration of soft tissue anesthesia (p = 0.10), onset of pulpal anesthesia in the second (p = 0.28) and first molars (p = 0.45), duration of pulp anesthesia of the second (p = 0.60) and first molars (p = 0.30), pain during puncture (p = 0.82) and injection (p = 0.80). No significant adverse events were observed. Buffered 2% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine did not differ from non-buffered 4% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine considering anesthetic success, safety, onset, duration of anesthesia, and pain on injection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brazilian oral research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brazilian oral research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2023.vol37.0132\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian oral research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2023.vol37.0132","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项交叉研究旨在比较缓冲 2% 阿替卡因与 1:200,000 肾上腺素的麻醉效果,以及非缓冲 4% 阿替卡因与 1:200,000 肾上腺素的麻醉效果。研究人员使用 1.8 毫升不同的局麻药溶液,分两次对 47 名志愿者的第二颗下颌磨牙颊面区进行了麻醉。对牙髓麻醉的起效时间和持续时间、软组织压痛阈值、穿刺疼痛评分以及注射时的灼热感进行了评估。操作者、志愿者和统计人员均为盲人。以下参数无明显差异:软组织麻醉开始时间(p = 0.80)、软组织麻醉持续时间(p = 0.10)、第二磨牙牙髓麻醉开始时间(p = 0.28)和第一磨牙牙髓麻醉开始时间(p = 0.45)、第二磨牙牙髓麻醉持续时间(p = 0.60)和第一磨牙牙髓麻醉持续时间(p = 0.30)、穿刺时疼痛(p = 0.82)和注射时疼痛(p = 0.80)。未观察到明显的不良反应。在麻醉成功率、安全性、起效时间、麻醉持续时间和注射疼痛方面,缓冲2%阿替卡因加1:200,000肾上腺素与非缓冲4%阿替卡因加1:200,000肾上腺素没有区别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Buffered 2% articaine in buccal infiltration of mandibular molars: a randomized triple-blind clinical trial.

This crossover study aimed to compare the anesthetic effects of buffered 2% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine with that of non-buffered 4% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine. Forty-seven volunteers were administered two doses of anesthesia in the buccal region of the second mandibular molars in two sessions using 1.8 mL of different local anesthetic solutions. The onset time and duration of pulp anesthesia, soft tissue pressure pain threshold, and the score of pain on puncture and burning during injection were evaluated. The operator, volunteers, and statistician were blinded. There were no significant differences in the parameters: onset of soft tissue anesthesia (p = 0.80), duration of soft tissue anesthesia (p = 0.10), onset of pulpal anesthesia in the second (p = 0.28) and first molars (p = 0.45), duration of pulp anesthesia of the second (p = 0.60) and first molars (p = 0.30), pain during puncture (p = 0.82) and injection (p = 0.80). No significant adverse events were observed. Buffered 2% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine did not differ from non-buffered 4% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine considering anesthetic success, safety, onset, duration of anesthesia, and pain on 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
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
107
审稿时长
12 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