Thakare Ashwin, Bhate Kalyani, Kathariya Rahul
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dr. D.Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune 18, India.
Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dr. D.Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune 18, India.
Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwan. 2014 Jun;52(2):59-63. doi: 10.1016/j.aat.2014.04.006. Epub 2014 Jun 11.
Articaine and bupivacaine are both amide-type local anesthetic (LA) agents, of almost equal potency. However, lidocaine is considered the gold standard and is the most widely used anesthetic agent because of its potency, safety, and efficiency. Articaine is fast acting and bupivacaine is a long-lasting LA. The aim of this randomized controlled crossover clinical study was to evaluate and compare the clinical anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 0.5% bupivacaine in orthodontic extractions models.
Forty systemically healthy patients (age range: 10-18 years), requiring premolar extraction for orthodontic reasons (all 4 premolars) were included. Patients were categorized into two groups (4% articaine and 0.5% bupivacaine) in a crossover manner (160 premolars). Parameters recorded included: time of anesthetic onset, duration of postoperative analgesia, time to first rescue analgesic medication, and visual analog scale (VAS). At the first appointment, both upper and lower premolars were extracted on one side of the jaws (right or left). A fixed volume of 1.4 mL of 4% articaine or 0.5% bupivacaine (based on a computer-generated list) was infiltrated in the buccal vestibule (local infiltration) for extraction. At the second appointment, after a washout period of 15 days, the anesthetic agent that was not administered at the first appointment was administered in a crossover manner. Each patient was evaluated using a 100-mm VAS during and after extraction.
The results showed that 4% articaine had significantly faster onset of action and lower VAS scores when compared with bupivacaine. However, the duration of analgesia and time to first rescue analgesic medication was longer in the bupivacaine group.
Articaine seemed to have better potency and efficacy in terms of onset of action and lower pain scores compared to the bupivacaine group. Further studies are required to confirm these results.
阿替卡因和布比卡因均为酰胺类局部麻醉剂,效力几乎相当。然而,利多卡因被视为金标准,因其效力、安全性和有效性而成为使用最广泛的麻醉剂。阿替卡因起效迅速,布比卡因是长效局部麻醉剂。本随机对照交叉临床研究的目的是评估和比较4%阿替卡因和0.5%布比卡因在正畸拔牙模型中的临床麻醉效果。
纳入40例因正畸原因需要拔除前磨牙(全部4颗前磨牙)的全身健康患者(年龄范围:10 - 18岁)。患者以交叉方式分为两组(4%阿替卡因和0.5%布比卡因)(共160颗前磨牙)。记录的参数包括:麻醉起效时间、术后镇痛持续时间、首次使用急救镇痛药物的时间以及视觉模拟评分(VAS)。在首次就诊时,在颌骨一侧(右侧或左侧)拔除上下前磨牙。根据计算机生成的列表,将固定体积1.4 mL的4%阿替卡因或0.5%布比卡因在颊侧前庭进行浸润(局部浸润)以进行拔牙。在第二次就诊时,经过15天的洗脱期后,以交叉方式给予首次就诊时未使用的麻醉剂。在拔牙期间及拔牙后,使用100 mm的VAS对每位患者进行评估。
结果显示,与布比卡因相比,4%阿替卡因的起效时间明显更快,VAS评分更低。然而,布比卡因组的镇痛持续时间和首次使用急救镇痛药物的时间更长。
与布比卡因组相比,阿替卡因在起效时间和较低疼痛评分方面似乎具有更好的效力和效果。需要进一步研究来证实这些结果。