Bortoluzzi M C, de Camargo Smolarek P, Cecato R, Pochapski M T, Chibinski A C R
Health Sciences Post-Graduate Program, School of Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa (UEPG), Ponta Grossa, Paraná, Brazil.
Dentistry Postgraduate Program, State University of Ponta Grossa (UEPG), Ponta Grossa, Paraná, Brazil.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Jul;47(7):933-939. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.11.011. Epub 2017 Dec 2.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of 4% articaine (Ar4) compared to 2% mepivacaine (Me2), both in combination with 1:100,000 epinephrine, in a unique soft tissue model. This was a randomized, double-blind, crossover clinical trial. The anaesthetic was applied to the lower lip using a computerized local delivery system. The following were evaluated: blood flow, thermal sensation, pressure and proprioception, extent of anaesthesia, gradual elimination, and the final duration of the effect of the anaesthesia. Seventy-two volunteers completed all parts of the study. Significant differences, which indicated better effectiveness of Me2 compared to Ar4, were observed in the following tests: reduction in blood flow (larger in the Me2 group); anaesthetized area at 30min (larger in the Me2 group); pressure tests; temperature tests after 20min; fine and discriminatory proprioception tests after 20min. The volunteers' perception of anaesthesia at 30, 40, 50, and 60min was superior for Me2 at all recorded time points. The duration of anaesthesia was also superior for Me2. The overall performance of Me2 was superior to Ar4, implying that Me2 provides a more effective anaesthesia in terms of depth, extent, and duration.
本研究的目的是在一个独特的软组织模型中，评估4%阿替卡因（Ar4）与2%甲哌卡因（Me2）联合1:100,000肾上腺素的临床疗效。这是一项随机、双盲、交叉临床试验。使用计算机化局部给药系统将麻醉剂应用于下唇。评估了以下指标：血流、热感觉、压力和本体感觉、麻醉范围、逐渐消除情况以及麻醉效果的最终持续时间。72名志愿者完成了研究的所有部分。在以下测试中观察到显著差异，表明Me2比Ar4更有效：血流减少（Me2组更大）；30分钟时的麻醉区域（Me2组更大）；压力测试；20分钟后的温度测试；20分钟后的精细和辨别性本体感觉测试。在所有记录的时间点，Me2在30、40、50和60分钟时志愿者对麻醉的感知均更优。Me2的麻醉持续时间也更优。Me2的总体表现优于Ar4，这意味着在深度、范围和持续时间方面，Me2能提供更有效的麻醉。
