Oral Surg Oral Med O
-
Oral Surg Oral Med O · Mar 2005
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialEfficacy of articaine and lidocaine in a primary intraligamentary injection administered with a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system.
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of the intraligamentary injection of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine, administered with computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system, in mandibular posterior teeth. ⋯ The efficacy of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine was similar to the efficacy of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine for intraligamentary injections.
-
Oral Surg Oral Med O · Feb 2005
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPreemptive rofecoxib and dexamethasone for prevention of pain and trismus following third molar surgery *.
Objective The goal of this preliminary randomized prospective clinical trial was to compare the analgesic efficacy and the reduction in trismus of preoperative rofecoxib, intraoperative dexamethasone, and both rofecoxib and dexamethasone following third molar extraction surgery. Study design Thirty-five subjects requiring surgical removal of at least 1 partial bony impacted mandibular third molar were invited to participate in this double-blind and double-dummy placebo-controlled clinical trial. Subjects were randomly assigned into 1 of 4 treatment groups: (1) placebo po preoperatively and placebo IV intraoperatively; (2) rofecoxib 50 mg po preoperatively and placebo IV intraoperatively; (3) placebo po preoperatively and dexamethasone10 mg IV intraoperatively; and (4) rofecoxib 50 mg po preoperatively and dexamethasone 10 mg IV intraoperatively. ⋯ The group receiving the combination of rofecoxib and dexamethasone showed a decrease in interincisal opening of 23.7% of baseline ( P < .05 vs placebo). Conclusions The results of this trial indicate that the use of intraoperative dexamethasone is an effective therapeutic strategy for limiting trismus following surgical removal of impacted third molars. The combination of preoperative rofecoxib 50 mg and intraoperative dexamethasone 10 mg was most effective in minimizing pain and trismus following third molar surgery.
-
Oral Surg Oral Med O · Dec 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialA prospective randomized crossover study of the preemptive analgesic effect of nitrous oxide in oral surgery.
Preliminary animal data has shown that nitrous oxide has a preemptive analgesic effect on postoperative pain. Whether a similar effect occurs in humans is not established. In this prospective randomized crossover study, we investigated the effect of preincisional versus postincisional nitrous oxide on postoperative oral surgical pain.Study design The trial was a crossover study where 36 patients had each of their symmetrical impacted mandibular third molars randomly scheduled for removal in 2 sessions. Each of the 36 patients acted as his or her own control; one side of the jaw was allocated randomly to receive nitrous oxide preoperatively (pretreated side) and the other side postoperatively (posttreated side). The pretreated side received 50% nitrous oxide preoperatively for 20 minutes and 100% oxygen postoperatively for 20 minutes as placebo. The posttreated side received 100% oxygen preoperatively for 20 minutes and 50% nitrous oxide postoperatively for 20 minutes. The difference in postoperative pain between the pretreated and posttreated sides was assessed by 4 primary end-points: pain intensity as measured by a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) hourly for 8 hours, time to first analgesic, total analgesic consumption during the first 48 hours, and a 5-point categorical patient global assessment scale (0=poor, 1=fair, 2=good, 3=very good, and 4=excellent). ⋯ Our results do not support the preliminary animal data that nitrous oxide has a preemptive analgesic effect for postoperative pain. 50% nitrous oxide administered preoperatively for 20 minutes has no preemptive analgesic effect on postextraction pain.
-
Oral Surg Oral Med O · Jul 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialInjection pain and postinjection pain of the anterior middle superior alveolar injection administered with the Wand or conventional syringe.
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, blinded study was to compare the pain of injection and post-injection pain of the AMSA injection using the computer-assisted Wand Plus injection system versus a conventional syringe. ⋯ The AMSA injection, using the Wand Plus, resulted in similar pain ratings for needle insertion as the conventional syringe but statistically lower pain ratings upon anesthetic solution deposition. However, the AMSA, using either the Wand Plus or a conventional syringe, has the potential to be a painful injection. We found the incidence of postinjection pain and sequelae was low with both techniques.
-
Oral Surg Oral Med O · Feb 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialInjection pain and postinjection pain of the palatal-anterior superior alveolar injection, administered with the Wand Plus system, comparing 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine to 3% mepivacaine.
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to compare injection pain and postinjection pain of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and 3% mepivacaine using the computer-assisted Wand Plus injection system to administer the palatal-anterior superior alveolar (P-ASA) injection. Additionally study was done to determine if the use of topical anesthetic decreased the pain of needle insertion with the P-ASA injection. ⋯ The P-ASA injection of 1.4 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or 3% mepivacaine, administered with the Wand Plus, has the potential to be a painful injection. The use of topical anesthetic did not significantly reduce pain of needle insertion when compared to a placebo. The incidence of postinjection pain, temporary numbness/paresthesia, and incisive papilla swelling or soreness would indicate that some pain and problems occur with the P-ASA technique, regardless of whether 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or 3% mepivacaine is used.