两种不同局部麻醉技术在单坐位根管治疗中术后疼痛的体内比较

Sumita . A Bhagwat, A. Mehta, L. Padhye
{"title":"两种不同局部麻醉技术在单坐位根管治疗中术后疼痛的体内比较","authors":"Sumita . A Bhagwat, A. Mehta, L. Padhye","doi":"10.4103/jorr.jorr_38_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: This in vivo split-mouth randomized control trial was carried out to study and compare the incidence of postoperative pain associated with single-sitting endodontic treatment using inferior alveolar nerve block and intraligamentary injection as primary anesthetic technique. Methods: A total of 30 patients with bilateral symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars were selected to be included in the study. In each subject, molar in one quadrant was randomly assigned to Group 1 (intraligamentary injection), and the molar in the opposite quadrant was assigned to Group 2 (inferior alveolar nerve block). The root canal procedures for the patients were carried out in single sittings under rubber dam using hand ProtaperTM system, 2.5% sodium hypochlorite as irrigant alternating with normal saline and obturation by the lateral condensation technique. A questionnaire employing Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain assessment was given to the patient and instructions on how to fill the form were given. VAS scores for every tooth treated in every patient were recorded before beginning treatment and after completion of treatment for each tooth. The patients were recalled after 2 days, and the scores were analyzed. The results were tabulated and statistically analyzed for incidence and degree of pain. Results: Group 1 and Group 2 showed a steady reduction in postoperative pain from 4 h to 48 h as seen in the mean VAS scores. Comparison between the two groups at each time interval showed a difference which was statistically insignificant (P > 0.05). Conclusion: There is no difference in the incidence of postoperative pain when either inferior alveolar nerve block or intraligamentary injection is employed as the primary technique for achieving anesthesia during single-sitting root canal treatment.","PeriodicalId":31361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral Research and Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In vivo comparison of postoperative pain using two different techniques for local anesthesia in single-sitting root canal treatment\",\"authors\":\"Sumita . A Bhagwat, A. Mehta, L. Padhye\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jorr.jorr_38_20\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: This in vivo split-mouth randomized control trial was carried out to study and compare the incidence of postoperative pain associated with single-sitting endodontic treatment using inferior alveolar nerve block and intraligamentary injection as primary anesthetic technique. Methods: A total of 30 patients with bilateral symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars were selected to be included in the study. In each subject, molar in one quadrant was randomly assigned to Group 1 (intraligamentary injection), and the molar in the opposite quadrant was assigned to Group 2 (inferior alveolar nerve block). The root canal procedures for the patients were carried out in single sittings under rubber dam using hand ProtaperTM system, 2.5% sodium hypochlorite as irrigant alternating with normal saline and obturation by the lateral condensation technique. A questionnaire employing Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain assessment was given to the patient and instructions on how to fill the form were given. VAS scores for every tooth treated in every patient were recorded before beginning treatment and after completion of treatment for each tooth. The patients were recalled after 2 days, and the scores were analyzed. The results were tabulated and statistically analyzed for incidence and degree of pain. Results: Group 1 and Group 2 showed a steady reduction in postoperative pain from 4 h to 48 h as seen in the mean VAS scores. Comparison between the two groups at each time interval showed a difference which was statistically insignificant (P > 0.05). Conclusion: There is no difference in the incidence of postoperative pain when either inferior alveolar nerve block or intraligamentary injection is employed as the primary technique for achieving anesthesia during single-sitting root canal treatment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oral Research and Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oral Research and Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jorr.jorr_38_20\",\"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 Oral Research and Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jorr.jorr_38_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

摘要

目的:本体内分口随机对照试验旨在研究和比较以下牙槽神经阻滞和韧带内注射为主要麻醉技术的单次坐位根管治疗术后疼痛的发生率。方法:选择30例双侧症状性下颌磨牙不可逆性牙髓炎患者作为研究对象。在每个受试者中,一个象限的磨牙被随机分配到第1组(韧带内注射),而另一象限的磨牙则被分配到第2组(下牙槽神经阻滞)。采用hand-ProtaperTM系统,2.5%次氯酸钠作为冲洗剂,与生理盐水交替,在橡胶坝下一次性进行根管手术,并采用侧冷凝技术进行封闭。采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)对患者进行疼痛评估,并给出了如何填写表格的说明。在开始治疗之前和每个牙齿的治疗完成之后,记录每个患者治疗的每个牙齿的VAS评分。患者在2天后被召回,并对评分进行分析。将结果制成表格,并对疼痛的发生率和程度进行统计分析。结果:第1组和第2组的平均VAS评分显示,术后4小时至48小时疼痛稳步减轻。两组在每个时间间隔的比较显示差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:在单次坐位根管治疗中,采用下牙槽神经阻滞或韧带内注射作为麻醉的主要技术,术后疼痛发生率没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
In vivo comparison of postoperative pain using two different techniques for local anesthesia in single-sitting root canal treatment
Aim: This in vivo split-mouth randomized control trial was carried out to study and compare the incidence of postoperative pain associated with single-sitting endodontic treatment using inferior alveolar nerve block and intraligamentary injection as primary anesthetic technique. Methods: A total of 30 patients with bilateral symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars were selected to be included in the study. In each subject, molar in one quadrant was randomly assigned to Group 1 (intraligamentary injection), and the molar in the opposite quadrant was assigned to Group 2 (inferior alveolar nerve block). The root canal procedures for the patients were carried out in single sittings under rubber dam using hand ProtaperTM system, 2.5% sodium hypochlorite as irrigant alternating with normal saline and obturation by the lateral condensation technique. A questionnaire employing Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain assessment was given to the patient and instructions on how to fill the form were given. VAS scores for every tooth treated in every patient were recorded before beginning treatment and after completion of treatment for each tooth. The patients were recalled after 2 days, and the scores were analyzed. The results were tabulated and statistically analyzed for incidence and degree of pain. Results: Group 1 and Group 2 showed a steady reduction in postoperative pain from 4 h to 48 h as seen in the mean VAS scores. Comparison between the two groups at each time interval showed a difference which was statistically insignificant (P > 0.05). Conclusion: There is no difference in the incidence of postoperative pain when either inferior alveolar nerve block or intraligamentary injection is employed as the primary technique for achieving anesthesia during single-sitting root canal treatment.
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
审稿时长
15 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