Maljaei Ensiyeh, Pourkazemi Maryam, Ghanizadeh Milad, Ranjbar Rana
Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Iran Endod J. 2017 Summer;12(3):276-281. doi: 10.22037/iej.v12i3.16464.
During the early mixed dentition period, the location of the deciduous maxillary second molar results in ineffectiveness of the infiltration technique in this area. In such cases, administration of posterior superior alveolar (PSA) nerve block is recommended; however, such a technique has some complications. The present study was undertaken to compare the effects of buccal infiltration of 4% Articaine and PSA technique with 2% Lidocaine on the success of anesthesia of maxillary deciduous second molars in 6 to 9-year old children.
In the present double-blind randomized clinical trial, 56 children aged 6-9 years requiring vital pulp therapy of deciduous maxillary second molar were included. In group 1, 4% Articaine was injected using a buccal infiltration technique. In group 2, 2% Lidocaine was injected using the PSA nerve block technique. After 10 min, the caries was removed and access cavity preparation was instituted. The patients were asked to report the presence or absence of pain during the procedure. Therefore, the existence of pain was measured by the patient's self-report. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistical methods and the -squared test.
Pain was reported by 6 (21.4%) and 9 (32.1%) subjects in the Articaine and Lidocaine groups, respectively. -squared test did not reveal any significant differences between the two groups (=0.54).
Under the limitations of the present study, there was no significant differences between the results of Articaine buccal infiltration and Lidocaine PSA technique, so Articaine buccal infiltration can be used as a substitute for the PSA technique.
在乳牙混合牙列早期，上颌乳第二磨牙的位置导致浸润技术在该区域无效。在这种情况下，建议采用上牙槽后（PSA）神经阻滞；然而，这种技术存在一些并发症。本研究旨在比较4%阿替卡因颊侧浸润与2%利多卡因PSA技术对上颌乳第二磨牙在6至9岁儿童中麻醉成功率的影响。
在本双盲随机临床试验中，纳入了56名年龄在6至9岁、需要对上颌乳第二磨牙进行牙髓治疗的儿童。第1组采用颊侧浸润技术注射4%阿替卡因。第2组采用PSA神经阻滞技术注射2%利多卡因。10分钟后，去除龋坏组织并制备进入洞型。要求患者报告操作过程中是否存在疼痛。因此，疼痛的存在通过患者的自我报告来衡量。数据采用描述性统计方法和卡方检验进行分析。
阿替卡因组和利多卡因组分别有6名（21.4%）和9名（32.1%）受试者报告疼痛。卡方检验未显示两组之间有任何显著差异（=0.54）。
在本研究的局限性下，阿替卡因颊侧浸润和利多卡因PSA技术的结果之间没有显著差异，因此阿替卡因颊侧浸润可作为PSA技术的替代方法。
