Intraseptal vs. periodontal ligament anaesthesia for maxillary tooth extraction: quality of local anaesthesia and haemodynamic response

Patient discomfort and intensity of intraseptal anesthesia of computer-controlled articaine/epinephrine delivery for scaling and root planing

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim was to assess the pain during intraseptal anesthesia (ISA) administration, as well as during and after scaling and root planing (SRP). The secondary aims pertained to comparing the pain in different jaw regions and evaluating the factors affecting pain during ISA administration, during and after SRP.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

ISA was obtained with three different doses of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (4%Ar + Ep) in 360 patients. The pain levels were measured using the visual analogue scales (VAS) for pain intensity during ISA administration (VASa), during SRP (VASi), and after SRP (VASp). These findings were then correlated with periodontal parameters. Regression analysis was performed for pain during ISA, during and after SRP.

RESULTS

Anesthesia administration was painful in 80.8% of cases. VASa negatively correlated with pocket depth (PPD). VASi showed no dose-dependency, except in mandibular premolars. VASi negatively correlated with the clinical attachment level (CAL). VASp positively correlated with PPD and CAL. Positive bleeding on probing reduced the chance of pain during ISA administration. Longer anesthesia duration and wider anesthetic field (orally) increased the prospects of painless SRP.

CONCLUSIONS

No dose-dependent differences were found regarding patient discomfort and pain intensity of ISA delivery of 4%Ar + Ep for SRP.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The pain during ISA administration was mild and well tolerated regardless of the anesthetic dose. A lower intensity of pain during SRP can be expected in patients with greater CAL. Post-treatment pain can be anticipated after SRP in the regions with greater PPD and CAL.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04392804 (May 9th, 2020).

Comparison of dental anesthetic efficacy between the periodontal intraligamentary anesthesia and other infiltration anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Uncertainty exists regarding the pain scores and the success rate of intraligamentary anesthesia compared to other infiltration anesthesia. Based on the conditions of clinical anesthesia techniques, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of intraligamentary anesthesia with other infiltration anesthesia.

Methods

The search was carried out in PubMed Central, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (via OVID), Embase (via OVID), and Scopus from the inception to March 26, 2023.

Results

Seven eligible randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The results indicated no significant difference in the success rate (RR = 0.96; 95% CI [0.81-1.14]; p = 0.65; I²= 73%) and visual analog scale (VAS) during dental procedures (MD = 3.81; 95% CI [-0.54-8.16]; p = 0.09; I²= 97%) between intraligamentary anesthesia and other infiltration anesthesia. However, intraligamentary anesthesia exhibited a higher VAS score during injection than other infiltration anesthesia (MD = 8.83; 95% CI [4.86-12.79]; p < 0.0001; I²= 90%). A subgroup analysis according to infiltration techniques showed that supraperiosteal anesthesia had a lower VAS score during dental procedures than intraligamentary anesthesia.

Conclusions

Intraligamentary anesthesia and other infiltration anesthesias have the same success rate and pain during dental procedures. However, the pain during injection of intraligamentary anesthesia is heavier than that of other infiltration anesthesia.

Efficacy of intraseptal anesthesia obtained by computer-controlled articaine with epinephrine delivery in scaling and root planing

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of the intraseptal anesthesia (ISA) obtained with three doses of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (4%Ar + Ep) for scaling and root planing (SRP), using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS). The secondary aims were to compare the clinical anesthetic parameters in relation to different jaw regions and examine the possible influence of sex and smoking habits on them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SRP under ISA obtained with different doses (0.1 ml, 0.2 ml, and 0.3 ml) of 4%Ar + Ep was performed in 360 patients. The success rate, onset, duration of soft tissue anesthesia, and the anesthetic field widths were recorded by pinprick testing.

RESULTS

The anesthesia success was high (90-95%). The onset was immediate. The duration and anesthetic field widths showed a dose-related significance, however, without a consistent sex-related or smoking-related significance. The multiple logistic regression analysis revealed a twofold higher chance of anesthesia success by increasing the dose and increased bleeding on probing-related and female sex-reduced probability of anesthesia success.

CONCLUSIONS

ISA obtained with 0.3 ml of 4%Ar + Ep delivered by a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system provided a high anesthetic success and the adequate clinical anesthetic parameters for SRP in all regions of both jaws.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

ISA obtained with 4%Ar + Ep provides an effective anesthesia for SRP. The anesthetic success rate may be reduced in the presence of gingival inflammation and in females as well. The study was registered in a Clinical Trials database (NCT04392804, registration date May 9, 2020).

Anesthetic efficacies of buccal with palatal injection versus buccal with intra-septal injection in permanent maxillary first molars of pediatric patients

The high success rate of dental treatment is dependent on the cooperation of pediatric patients during procedures. Dental treatment often causes pain, particularly in children. The factors in providing treatment to pediatric patients include the characteristics and location of the tooth, profoundness of the anesthesia including the type of local anesthetic, and cooperation of the patient. Previous studies have examined several techniques to successfully achieve profound pulpal anesthesia in maxillary permanent teeth. The dentist should select the injection technique to be used based on patient needs. In children, either buccal with palatal injections or buccal with intra-septal injections may be used to anesthetize the permanent maxillary first molar. Buccal with palatal injections are commonly used prior to routine maxillary dental procedures. Currently, there are only a few studies on the employment of buccal with intra-septal injections to anesthetize permanent maxillary first molars in pediatric patients. This review will focus on efficacy of buccal with palatal versus buccal with intra-septal pulpal anesthesia of the permanent maxillary first molars in pediatric patients and aim to determine which technique should be used during routine dental procedures.

Efficacy of Pulpal Anesthesia Using a Needle-less Syringe

The purpose of this study was to investigate the manufacturer's claims regarding a novel needleless intraligamentary local anesthesia injection device (Numbee, BioDent) to provide effective single tooth anesthesia. Investigators compared the Numbee with a traditional inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) during a restorative procedure on mandibular teeth. A randomized, split-mouth design was conducted with 15 adult subjects receiving an IANB on one side and a Numbee injection on the same tooth type on the contralateral side. Subjects recorded injection pain using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and their preferred injection technique. Anesthesia was considered profound with 2 consecutive electric pulp tester readings of 80. If subjects became symptomatic during the restorative procedure, rescue anesthesia was administered. The difference in VAS scores for injection pain between the Numbee and the IANB was not significant (p = .078). For the IANB, the incidence of profound anesthesia was 46%, and required rescue anesthesia was 20%. For the Numbee, the incidence of profound anesthesia was 0%, and required rescue anesthesia was 60%. Subject preference was evenly split (50/50%) between the 2 techniques. The IANB outperformed the Numbee device for achieving profound anesthesia and requiring less rescue anesthesia.

Comparison of Pain Perception Using Conventional Versus Computer-Controlled Intraligamentary Local Anesthetic Injection for Extraction of Primary Molars

This study was conducted to compare pain perception of intraligamentary anesthesia (ILA) using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS) versus a conventional intraligamentary injection for extraction of primary molars. A randomized controlled trial was designed where 82 children requiring 102 primary molar extractions were given ILA of 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine with either the conventional method or a CCLADS. Pain during injection and extraction was assessed using the Sound, Eye, Motor (SEM) scale and heart rate recording. Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS) scores were self-reported by patients. The Mann-Whitney test was used for evaluation of FPS and SEM scores and Student's t test for evaluation of heart rate readings. Heart rate values during injection were found to be higher, but not statistically significantly higher (p = .077), for conventional injection versus CCLADS; however, heart rate values during extraction were significantly higher for the conventional method (p = .009). Both FPS and SEM values were found to be significantly higher for conventional ILA technique (p < .05). ILA can be an effective alternative means of anesthesia for primary molar extractions, and CCLADS devices can make ILA more effective and less painful.

Anesthetic Efficacy of Articaine and Lidocaine in a Primary Intraseptal Injection: A Prospective, Randomized Double-Blind Study

Additional studies are needed to evaluate intraseptal anesthesia in the mandibular first molar. The purpose of this study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of a primary intraseptal injection of articaine and lidocaine, administered with a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (CCLAD) system, in asymptomatic mandibular first molars. Using a crossover design, 100 subjects randomly received intraseptal injections of 1.4 mL of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine, both with 1:100,000 epinephrine, at 2 separate appointments. Injections were given in the interdental papillae, mesial (0.7 mL) and distal (0.7 mL) to the first molar. An electric pulp tester was used to test for pulpal anesthesia. Pain of injection, postoperative pain, and pulse rate were also evaluated. Data were statistically analyzed. Anesthetic success rate for the mandibular first molar was 32% for articaine and 30% for lidocaine, with no statistically significant difference (p = .8689) between the two. No significant differences were found between formulations for pain of injection. The intraseptal injection did not cause a clinically meaningful increase in pulse rate. Postoperative pain decreased each day with no significant differences between formulations. In conclusion, a primary intraseptal injection does not achieve a high success rate of pulpal anesthesia in the mandibular first molar.

Periodontal ligament injection versus routine local infiltration for nonsurgical single posterior maxillary permanent tooth extraction: comparative double-blinded randomized clinical study

Aim

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of, and patients’ subjective responses to, periodontal ligament (PDL) anesthetic injection compared to traditional local-anesthetic infiltration injection for the nonsurgical extraction of one posterior maxillary permanent tooth.

Materials and methods

All patients scheduled for nonsurgical symmetrical maxillary posterior permanent tooth extraction in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at the University of Jordan Hospital, Amman, Jordan over a 7-month period were invited to participate in this prospective randomized double-blinded split-mouth study. Every patient received the recommended volume of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine for PDL injection on the experimental side and for local infiltration on the control side. A visual analog scale (VAS) and verbal rating scale (VRS) were used to describe pain felt during injection and extraction, respectively. Statistical significance was based on probability values <0.05 and measured using χ² and Student t-tests and nonparametric Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis tests.

Results

Of the 73 patients eligible for this study, 55 met the inclusion criteria: 32 males and 23 females, with a mean age of 34.87±14.93 years. Differences in VAS scores and VRS data between the two techniques were statistically significant (P<0.001) and in favor of the infiltration injection.

Conclusion

The PDL injection may not be the alternative anesthetic technique of choice to routine local infiltration for the nonsurgical extraction of one posterior maxillary permanent tooth.

The impact of cardiovascular drugs on the efficacy of local anesthesia in dentistry

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Drugs used chronically by patients with diseases of the cardiovascular system (group C of the ATC classification) may act on adrenergic receptors and/or certain ion channels, which gives them the potential to interact with the action of local dental anesthetics. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of systemically administered chronic cardiovascular medication (oral route) on the efficacy of intraoral local anesthesia in patients with diseases of the cardiovascular system.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study which analyzed the efficacy of local terminal anesthesia (onset of anesthesia, duration anesthetized area) in the upper jaw of 70 patients: 40 patients on medication for cardiovascular system disorders and 30 patients who were not using these drugs (the control group). The following cardiovascular drugs were used: beta blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, vasodilatators, diuretics, angiotensin receptor blockers, antiarrhythmics, statins and alfa blockers.

RESULTS

The onset of anesthesia on the vestibular side was faster in those taking cardiovascular drugs (40.50±19.87 s) than the control patients (58.93±31.07 s; P = 0.004) and duration of anesthesia on this side was shorter. Although the difference was not significant, it was evident that on vestibular and palatal side the anesthetized area was more rapidly reduced in the patients taking cardiovascular drugs. The duration of cardiovascular therapy also had a significant impact on the anesthetized area.

CONCLUSION

Drugs acting on cardiovascular system may influence the effect of local anesthetics used in dentistry, possibly through interaction with autonomic receptors and ion channels.

Role of intraseptal anesthesia for pain-free dental treatment

Pain control during the dental procedure is essentials and challenging. A complete efficacious pulp anesthesia has not been attained yet. The regional anesthesia such as inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) only does not guarantee the effective anesthesia with patients suffering from irreversible pulpitis. This main aim of this review was to discuss various aspects of intraseptal dental anesthesia and its role significance in pain-free treatment in the dental office. In addition, reasons of failure and limitations of this technique have been highlighted. Literature search was conducted for peer-reviewed articles published in English language in last 30 years. Search words such as dental anesthesia, pain control, intraseptal, and nerve block were entered using a web of knowledge and Google scholar databases. Various dental local anesthesia techniques were reviewed. A combination of block anesthesia, buccal infiltration and intraligamentary injection resulted in deep anesthesia (P = 0.003), and higher success rate compared to IANB. For pain-free management of conditions such as irreversible pulpitis, buccal infiltration (4% articaine), and intraosseous injection (2% lidocaine) are better than intraligamentary and IANB injections. Similarly, nerve block is not always effective for pain-free root canal treatment hence, needing supplemental anesthesia. Intraseptal anesthesia is an efficient and effective technique that can be used in maxillary and mandibular adult dentition. This technique is also beneficial when used in conjunction to the regional block or local dental anesthesia.

Clinical efficacy of a computerised device (STA™) and a pressure syringe (VarioJect INTRA™) for intraligamentary anaesthesia

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the impact of experience whilst using different devices for intraligamentary anaesthesia, dental students tested clinical anaesthetic efficacy of a mechanical (PDL-S) and a computer-controlled (CCLAD) application system in restorative patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a prospective study, 41 Patients in need of restorative treatment in lower posterior mandible were randomised into three groups (PDL-S: teeth n = 22; CCLAD: teeth n = 20; inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB): teeth n = 20). Dental last year students conducted anaesthesia and dental treatment. Primary objectives were differences in pain during treatment [numeric rating scale (NRS)] as well as in anaesthetic efficacy (complete/sufficient vs. insufficient/no effect) between PDL-S and CCLAD. Pain of injection, need for second injections, amount of anaesthetic solution and duration of local numbness were assessed. IANB as gold standard was compared to each system descriptively.

RESULTS

PDL-S had a significant lower pain during treatment (P = 0.017) but a similar anaesthetic efficacy (P = 0.175) compared to the CCLAD system. Concerning pain of injection (P = 0.42), quantity of second injections (P = 0.232), amount of used solution (P = 0.073) as well as duration of local numbness (P = 0.253), no differences were seen. When comparing both periodontal ligament injection (PDL)-systems with IANB, pain rating was higher when using CCLAD. Injection pain, amount of used solution as well as soft tissue anaesthesia was less for PDL-S and CCLAD.

DISCUSSION

Both PDL techniques showed a good success for dental routine treatments. Although, compared to the mechanic device, the CCLAD system might need more clinical daily experience.

CONCLUSION

We recommend including specific trainings in intraligamentary anaesthesia in the dental curriculum.

Efficacy and safety of intraseptal and periodontal ligament anesthesia achieved by computer-controlled articaine + epinephrine delivery: a dose-finding study

OBJECTIVES

The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the dose-dependent anesthetic efficacy of the intraseptal anesthesia (ISA) and periodontal ligament anesthesia (PLA) obtained with different volumes of 4 % articaine and 1:100,000 epinephrine (Ar + Ep) in human mandibular premolars, using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS). The safety profile of Ar + Ep was also studied by investigating the stability of cardiovascular parameters.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One hundred and eighty randomly selected healthy volunteers (ASA I) entered the single-blinded study to receive 16 mg + 4 μg, 24 mg + 6 μg, and 32 mg + 8 μg of Ar + Ep, obtained with different volumes (0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 ml, respectively), for the ISA and PLA. Success rate, onset, and duration of profound pulpal anesthesia were evaluated by the electrical pulp tester, while the width of the anesthetic field and duration of soft tissue anesthesia were recorded using the pinprick testing. A monitor was used for the measurement of cardiovascular parameters.

RESULTS

A dose-dependent duration of pulpal and soft tissue anesthesia was obtained only by the ISA. Success rate, duration of both pulpal and soft tissue anesthesia, and its width were significantly better in the ISA compared with the PLA. No significant cardiovascular changes were seen in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

It can be suggested that 0.6 and 0.8 ml of 4 % Ar + 1:100,000 Ep, delivered by CCLADS, offer high success rate and effective clinical parameters of ISA as a primary anesthesia.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

It seems that dental procedures requiring profound pulpal, bone, and soft tissue anesthesia could be effectively and safely obtained by mentioned anesthetic protocol.