Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil.
Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil
J Dent Res. 2015 Sep;94(9 Suppl):166S-73S. doi: 10.1177/0022034515596313. Epub 2015 Jul 22.
This double-blind crossover randomized clinical trial compared the efficacy of 2 concentrations of articaine, 2% (A2) and 4% (A4), with 1:200,000 epinephrine, for lower third molar removal. During 2 separate appointments with either A2 or A4, both similarly positioned lower third molars in 46 volunteers were extracted. The following were evaluated: onset and duration of anesthetic action on soft tissues, intraoperative bleeding, hemodynamic parameters, postoperative analgesia, and mouth opening and wound healing during the 7th postoperative day, along with the incidence, type, and severity of adverse reactions. Nearly identical volumes of both anesthetic solutions were used for each appointment: 3.4 ± 0.9 mL ≈ 68 mg of articaine (A2) and 3.3 ± 0.8 mL ≈ 132 mg of articaine (A4). Statistical analysis indicated no differences in onset or duration of anesthetic action on soft tissues or duration of postoperative analgesia evoked by A2 and A4 anesthetic solutions (P > 0.05). The surgeon's rating of intraoperative bleeding was considered minimal throughout all surgery with both anesthetic solutions. While transient changes in blood pressure, heart rate, and oxygen saturation were observed, these factors were clinically insignificant and were uninfluenced by articaine concentration (P > 0.05). No systemic or local adverse reactions were observed in the preoperative and postoperative periods due to A2 or A4, but 1 case of bilateral paresthesia was observed. There were no significant differences between preoperative and postoperative (7th day) values of mouth opening and wound healing whether volunteers received A2 or A4 (P > 0.05). In conclusion, both A2 and A4, administered in equal volumes, were effective and safe during lower third molar surgery, and no significant differences were found between their efficacy and safety (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02457325).
这是一项双盲交叉随机临床试验,比较了 2%(A2)和 4%(A4)浓度的阿替卡因,与 1:200,000 肾上腺素,在拔除下颌第三磨牙方面的疗效。在 46 名志愿者的 2 次不同预约中,使用相同位置的下颌第三磨牙,分别使用 A2 或 A4 进行拔除。评估内容包括:软组织麻醉作用的起效时间和持续时间、术中出血、血流动力学参数、术后镇痛、术后第 7 天的张口和伤口愈合情况,以及不良反应的发生率、类型和严重程度。每次预约使用的两种麻醉溶液的体积几乎相同:3.4 ± 0.9 mL ≈ 68 mg 阿替卡因(A2)和 3.3 ± 0.8 mL ≈ 132 mg 阿替卡因(A4)。统计分析表明,A2 和 A4 麻醉溶液对软组织的起效时间和持续时间或术后镇痛持续时间无差异(P > 0.05)。在所有手术中,两种麻醉溶液的术中出血均被认为是轻微的。虽然观察到血压、心率和血氧饱和度的短暂变化,但这些因素在临床上并不重要,也不受阿替卡因浓度的影响(P > 0.05)。在术前和术后期间,由于使用 A2 或 A4,均未观察到全身或局部不良反应,但观察到 1 例双侧感觉异常。无论志愿者接受 A2 还是 A4,张口和伤口愈合的术前和术后(第 7 天)值均无显著差异(P > 0.05)。总之,在拔除下颌第三磨牙手术中,等量使用 A2 和 A4 均有效且安全,其疗效和安全性之间未发现显著差异(ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02457325)。