Loading...
Publication
Influência da técnica de anestesia na exodontia de 1os e 2os molares mandibulares: anestesia subperióstea vs. anestesia loco- regional: ensaio clínico aleatorizado (1B)
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 736.98 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Introdução: Quando é necessário realizar exodontia de 1os ou 2os molares mandibulares a escolha da técnica anestésica da maioria dos profissionais de saúde oral irá recair sobre o bloqueio loco-regional, no entanto, com o aparecimento da articaína pode ser possível alcançar uma anestesia eficaz pela técnica subperióstea. Assim, este estudo tem como objetivo comparar a eficácia anestésica do Cloridrato de articaína a 4% com epinefrina a 1:200 000 na exodontia de 1os e 2os molares mandibulares quando utilizada anestesia subperióstea vs. anestesia loco- regional.
Tipo de estudo: Ensaio clínico aleatorizado
Materiais e métodos: Ensaio clínico aleatorizado com 15 pacientes, que se dirigiram à clínica universitária da Faculdade de Medicina Dentária da Universidade de Lisboa, para a extração de 1os ou 2os molares mandibulares.
Após aleatorização os pacientes receberam anestesia loco-regional ou anestesia infiltrativa de acordo com o grupo atribuído. De forma a determinar a eficácia anestésica alcançada para cada uma das técnicas, foi registada numa escala VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) a dor sentida antes, durante e após o procedimento e a dor durante a anestesia. Foi registada pelo clínico a quantidade de anestésico utilizado.
Resultados: Não foram encontradas diferenças estatisticamente significativas (p<0.05) quando se compara a dor sentida antes, durante e após o procedimento e a dor durante a anestesia. Foram verificadas diferenças estatisticamente significativas (p<0.05) entre a quantidade de anestésico utilizado pelas duas técnicas.
Conclusões: Os resultados deste estudo sugerem que não existe diferença na eficácia anestésica do Cloridrato de articaína a 4% com epinefrina a 1:200 000 na exodontia de 1os e 2os molares mandibulares quando utilizada anestesia subperióstea vs. anestesia loco-regional.
Introduction: When it’s necessary to extract a 1st or 2nd mandibular molar, the choice of anesthesia for most oral health professionals will depend on the loco-regional block, however, with the appearance of articaine it may be possible to achieve an effective anesthesia by the subperiosteal technique. Thus, the aim of this study is to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride with 1:200,000 epinephrine in the extraction of 1st and 2nd mandibular molars, when using subperiosteal anesthesia vs. loco-regional anesthesia. Type of study: Randomized clinical trial Materials e methods: Randomized clinical trial with 15 patients, who went to the university clinic of the Faculty of Dental Medicine of the University of Lisbon, for the extraction of 1st or 2nd mandibular molars. After randomization the patients received loco-regional anesthesia or infiltrative anesthesia according to the assigned group. In order to determine the anesthetic efficacy achieved for each of the techniques, the pain experienced before, during and after the procedure and the pain during anesthetic was recorded on a VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) scale. The amount of anesthetic used was recorded by the clinician. Results: There were no statistically significant differences (p <0.05) when comparing pain before, during and after the procedure and pain during anesthesia. There were statistically significant differences (p <0.05) between the amount of anesthetic used by the two techniques. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that there is no difference in the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine Hydrochloride with epinephrine at 1: 200,000 in the 1st and 2nd mandibular molar extraction when subperiosteal anesthesia is used versus locoregional anesthesia.
Introduction: When it’s necessary to extract a 1st or 2nd mandibular molar, the choice of anesthesia for most oral health professionals will depend on the loco-regional block, however, with the appearance of articaine it may be possible to achieve an effective anesthesia by the subperiosteal technique. Thus, the aim of this study is to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride with 1:200,000 epinephrine in the extraction of 1st and 2nd mandibular molars, when using subperiosteal anesthesia vs. loco-regional anesthesia. Type of study: Randomized clinical trial Materials e methods: Randomized clinical trial with 15 patients, who went to the university clinic of the Faculty of Dental Medicine of the University of Lisbon, for the extraction of 1st or 2nd mandibular molars. After randomization the patients received loco-regional anesthesia or infiltrative anesthesia according to the assigned group. In order to determine the anesthetic efficacy achieved for each of the techniques, the pain experienced before, during and after the procedure and the pain during anesthetic was recorded on a VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) scale. The amount of anesthetic used was recorded by the clinician. Results: There were no statistically significant differences (p <0.05) when comparing pain before, during and after the procedure and pain during anesthesia. There were statistically significant differences (p <0.05) between the amount of anesthetic used by the two techniques. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that there is no difference in the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine Hydrochloride with epinephrine at 1: 200,000 in the 1st and 2nd mandibular molar extraction when subperiosteal anesthesia is used versus locoregional anesthesia.
Description
Keywords
Saúde oral Teses de mestrado - 2019