Shabazfar N, Daubländer M, Al-Nawas B, Kämmerer P W
Department of Oral, Maxillofacial and Plastic Surgery, University Medical Centre Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(2):351-8. doi: 10.1007/s00784-013-1113-1. Epub 2013 Sep 29.
In a first meta-analysis, inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) and periodontal intraligamentary injection anesthesia (ILA) were compared with focus on the failure rate of local anesthesia, pain during injection, additional injections, cardiovascular disturbances (CVD), and method-inherent differences (unwanted side effects, latency time, amount of anesthetic solution, duration of anesthesia) in adult patients.
Prospective and retrospective studies with clinical comparison of both injection techniques considering the relevant outcome parameters in adult patients from 1979 to 2012 were included. A specific tool for assessing risk of bias in each included study was adopted. Data were assessed for methodological reliability and extracted and supplemented by sensitivity analysis by two independent reviewers.
Seven studies were included [evidence grade Ib (n=1), IIb (n=3), and III (n=3)]. For other parameter than CVD, the significant heterogeneity of the random effects did not allow the reporting of pooled summary effect estimates. CVD were found significantly more often after IANB [odds ratio (OR): 0.12 (0.02-0.69)]. Further analysis revealed less injection pain in cases of ILA [OR: 0.32 (0.1-1)]. For failure rates as well as for needed additional injections, no significant differences were detected. IANB showed a latency of >3 min, whereas ILA had nearly none. The effect of IANB is longer than for ILA.
Methodological and reporting flaws were consistently observed in the included articles. Except for CVD, it could not be shown that ILA is neither superior nor inferior compared to IANB.
IANB as "gold standard" for routine dental treatments should be discussed.
在首个荟萃分析中,对成人患者下牙槽神经阻滞(IANB)和牙周韧带内注射麻醉(ILA)进行比较,重点关注局部麻醉失败率、注射时疼痛、追加注射、心血管紊乱(CVD)以及方法固有差异(不良副作用、潜伏期、麻醉剂溶液用量、麻醉持续时间)。
纳入1979年至2012年期间对成年患者两种注射技术进行临床比较并考虑相关结局参数的前瞻性和回顾性研究。采用一种评估各纳入研究偏倚风险的特定工具。由两名独立审阅者对数据进行方法学可靠性评估,并通过敏感性分析进行提取和补充。
纳入七项研究[证据等级Ib(n = 1)、IIb(n = 3)和III(n = 3)]。对于除CVD之外的其他参数,随机效应的显著异质性使得无法报告合并的汇总效应估计值。IANB后CVD的发生率显著更高[优势比(OR):0.12(0.02 - 0.69)]。进一步分析显示ILA注射时疼痛较轻[OR:0.32(0.1 - 1)]。在失败率以及所需追加注射方面,未检测到显著差异。IANB的潜伏期>3分钟,而ILA几乎没有潜伏期。IANB的效果比ILA持续时间更长。
在所纳入的文章中始终观察到方法学和报告方面的缺陷。除CVD外,无法表明ILA与IANB相比既不优越也不逊色。
应讨论将IANB作为常规牙科治疗“金标准”的问题。