Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study

被引:17
作者
Beneito-Brotons, Rut
Penarrocha-Oltra, David [1 ]
Ata-Ali, Javier [1 ,2 ]
Penarrocha, Maria [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Valencia, Sch Med & Dent, Valencia, Spain
[2] Valencian Hlth Serv, Valencia, Spain
来源
MEDICINA ORAL PATOLOGIA ORAL Y CIRUGIA BUCAL | 2012年 / 17卷 / 03期
关键词
Anesthesia; intraosseous; oral anesthesia; infiltrating; mandibular block; Quicksleeper (R); EFFICACY; ADOLESCENTS; CHILDREN; TEETH;
D O I
10.4317/medoral.17543
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare a computerized intraosseous anesthesia system with the conventional oral anesthesia techniques, and analyze the latency and duration of the anesthetic effect and patient preference. Design: A simple-blind prospective study was made between March 2007 and May 2008. Each patient was subjected to two anesthetic techniques: conventional and intraosseous using the Quicksleeper (R) system (DHT, Cholet, France). A split-mouth design was adopted in which each patient underwent treatment of a tooth with one of the techniques, and treatment of the homologous contralateral tooth with the other technique. The treatments consisted of restorations, endodontic procedures and simple extractions. Results: The study series comprised 12 females and 18 males with a mean age of 36.8 years. The 30 subjects underwent a total of 60 anesthetic procedures. Intraosseous and conventional oral anesthesia caused discomfort during administration in 46.3% and 32.1% of the patients, respectively. The latency was 7.1 +/- 2.23 minutes for the conventional technique and 0.48 +/- 0.32 for intraosseous anesthesia - the difference being statistically significant. The depth of the anesthetic effect was sufficient to allow the patients to tolerate the dental treatments. The duration of the anesthetic effect in soft tissues was 199.3 minutes with the conventional technique versus only 1.6 minutes with intraosseous anesthesia - the difference between the two techniques being statistically significant. Most of the patients (69.7%) preferred intraosseous anesthesia. Conclusions: The described intraosseous anesthetic system is effective, with a much shorter latency than the conventional technique, sufficient duration of anesthesia to perform the required dental treatments, and with a much lesser soft tissue anesthetic effect. Most of the patients preferred intraosseous anesthesia.
引用
收藏
页码:E426 / E429
页数:4
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]   Anesthetic efficacy of the intraosseous injection in maxillary and mandibular teeth [J].
Coggins, R ;
Reader, A ;
Nist, R ;
Beck, M ;
Meyers, WJ .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1996, 81 (06) :634-641
[2]   Anesthetic efficacy of the intraosseous injection after an inferior alveolar nerve block [J].
Dunbar, D ;
Reader, A ;
Nist, R ;
Beck, M ;
Meyers, WJ .
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 1996, 22 (09) :481-486
[3]   A comparison of two intraosseous anesthetic techniques in mandibular posterior teeth [J].
Gallatin, J ;
Reader, A ;
Nusstein, J ;
Beck, M ;
Weaver, J .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION, 2003, 134 (11) :1476-1484
[4]   THE EFFICACY OF AN INTRAOSSEOUS INJECTION - SYSTEM OF DELIVERING LOCAL-ANESTHETIC [J].
LEONARD, MS .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 126 (01) :81-86
[5]   Anesthetic efficacy of the supplemental X-tip intraosseous injection in patients with irreversible pulpitis [J].
Nusstein, J ;
Kennedy, S ;
Reader, AI ;
Beck, M ;
Weaver, J .
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 2003, 29 (11) :724-728
[6]  
Nusstein John, 2005, Gen Dent, V53, P50
[7]  
Prohic Samir, 2005, Bosn J Basic Med Sci, V5, P57
[8]  
Quarnstrom F, 2001, Dent Today, V20, P114
[9]   The efficacy of IntraFlow intraosseous injection as a primary anesthesia technique [J].
Remmers, Todd ;
Glickman, Gerald ;
Spears, Robert ;
He, Jianing .
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 2008, 34 (03) :280-283
[10]  
Sierra Rebolledo Alejandro, 2007, Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal, V12, pE139