• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

2%利多卡因和 4%阿替卡因在口腔外科手术中的疗效比较研究。

Efficacy of 2% Lignocaine and 4% Articaine in Oral Surgical Procedure: A Comparative Study.

机构信息

Department of Dentistry, Patna Medical College and Hospital, Patna, Bihar, India.

Department of Dentistry, Patna Medical College and Hospital, Patna, Bihar, India, Phone: +91 8971089231, e-mail:

出版信息

J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020 Oct 1;21(10):1146-1149.

PMID:33686037
Abstract

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of 2% lignocaine and 4% articaine in the extraction of mandibular molars.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted on 120 patients requiring surgical removal of tooth. Patients were categorized into 2 groups with 60 samples each. Group I patients were administered 2% lignocaine with 1:50,000 epinephrine and group II patients were administered 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine for the extraction of mandibular molar. Inferior alveolar nerve, lingual, and buccal nerve block used in both groups to anesthetize the area.

RESULTS

The mean onset of action in group I was 85.2 seconds and in group II was 52.6 seconds, duration of anesthesia in group I was 170.2 minutes and in group II was 226.8 minutes, duration of procedure was 30.4 minutes in group I and 32.6 minutes in group II, pain during procedure in group I was 2.75 and in group II was 1.42, pain after procedure was 1.41 in group I and 0.82 in group II, pain during anesthesia insertion was 1.52 in group I and 1.04 in group II. Forty-six (76.7%) patients in group I and 52 (86.7%) patients in group II did not require re-anesthesia, while 12 (20%) in group I and 8 (13.3%) in group II required 1 time re-anesthesia and 2 (3.3%) patients required 2 times re-anesthesia in group I.

CONCLUSION

Articaine can be effectively used in oral surgical procedures as there is early onset of action, longer duration of anesthesia, and less need of re-anesthesia.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Articaine is more effective compared to lignocaine, hence it can be recommended alternatively for tooth extraction and other oral surgical procedures.

摘要

目的和目标

比较 2%利多卡因和 4%阿替卡因在下颌磨牙拔除术中的疗效。

材料和方法

本研究纳入了 120 名需要手术拔牙的患者。将患者分为两组,每组 60 例。组 I 患者给予 2%利多卡因加 1:50000 肾上腺素,组 II 患者给予 4%阿替卡因加 1:100000 肾上腺素用于下颌磨牙拔除。两组均采用下牙槽神经、舌神经和颊神经阻滞麻醉。

结果

组 I 的起效时间平均为 85.2 秒,组 II 为 52.6 秒,组 I 的麻醉持续时间为 170.2 分钟,组 II 为 226.8 分钟,组 I 的手术时间为 30.4 分钟,组 II 为 32.6 分钟,组 I 的手术过程中疼痛评分为 2.75,组 II 为 1.42,组 I 的术后疼痛评分为 1.41,组 II 为 0.82,组 I 的麻醉插入时疼痛评分为 1.52,组 II 为 1.04。组 I 中 46(76.7%)例患者和组 II 中 52(86.7%)例患者无需再次麻醉,组 I 中 12(20%)例患者和组 II 中 8(13.3%)例患者需要再次麻醉 1 次,组 I 中 2(3.3%)例患者需要再次麻醉 2 次。

结论

阿替卡因可有效用于口腔外科手术,因为它起效迅速,麻醉持续时间长,且需要再次麻醉的次数较少。

临床意义

阿替卡因比利多卡因更有效,因此可替代推荐用于拔牙和其他口腔外科手术。

相似文献

1
Efficacy of 2% Lignocaine and 4% Articaine in Oral Surgical Procedure: A Comparative Study.2%利多卡因和 4%阿替卡因在口腔外科手术中的疗效比较研究。
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020 Oct 1;21(10):1146-1149.
2
Infiltrative local anesthesia with articaine is equally as effective as inferior alveolar nerve block with lidocaine for the removal of erupted molars.对于拔除已萌出的磨牙,使用阿替卡因进行浸润局部麻醉与使用利多卡因进行下牙槽神经阻滞的效果相同。
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Sep;21(3):295-299. doi: 10.1007/s10006-017-0628-z. Epub 2017 May 25.
3
Comparative study of the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine in inferior alveolar nerve block during surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars.在拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙手术中,4%阿替卡因与2%利多卡因在下牙槽神经阻滞麻醉效果的比较研究。
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2007 Mar 1;12(2):E139-44.
4
Local anaesthesia for surgical extraction of mandibular third molars: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.下颌第三磨牙外科拔除术的局部麻醉:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
Clin Oral Investig. 2020 Nov;24(11):3781-3800. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03490-3. Epub 2020 Aug 24.
5
Comparing anesthetic efficacy of articaine versus lidocaine as a supplemental buccal infiltration of the mandibular first molar after an inferior alveolar nerve block.在下牙槽神经阻滞麻醉后,比较阿替卡因与利多卡因作为下颌第一磨牙颊侧补充浸润麻醉的麻醉效果。
J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Sep;139(9):1228-35. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0338.
6
Comparative Study of the Efficacy of 4% Articaine vs 2% Lidocaine in Surgical Removal of Bilaterally Impacted Mandibular Third Molars.4%阿替卡因与2%利多卡因在双侧下颌阻生第三磨牙拔除术中疗效的比较研究
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2018 Jun 1;19(6):743-748.
7
Comparative evaluation of anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine infiltration versus 2% lignocaine inferior alveolar nerve block for extraction of primary mandibular molars: A prospective, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial.4%阿替卡因浸润麻醉与 2%利多卡因下牙槽神经阻滞用于下颌第一磨牙拔除的麻醉效果比较:一项前瞻性、随机对照、split-mouth 试验。
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2021 Oct-Dec;39(4):409-415. doi: 10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_260_21.
8
Anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lignocaine during the surgical removal of the third molar: A comparative prospective study.4%阿替卡因与2%利多卡因在拔除第三磨牙手术中的麻醉效果:一项对比性前瞻性研究。
Anesth Essays Res. 2016 May-Aug;10(2):356-61. doi: 10.4103/0259-1162.171445.
9
Evaluation of Buccal Infiltration with Articaine and Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block with Lignocaine for Pulp Therapy in Mandibular Primary Molars.在下颌乳磨牙牙髓治疗中,阿替卡因颊侧浸润麻醉与利多卡因下牙槽神经阻滞麻醉的效果评估。
J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016;40(4):301-5. doi: 10.17796/1053-4628-40.4.301.
10
Comparison of anesthetic efficacy of 2 and 4 % articaine in inferior alveolar nerve block for tooth extraction-a double-blinded randomized clinical trial.2%与4%阿替卡因在下牙槽神经阻滞用于拔牙的麻醉效果比较——一项双盲随机临床试验
Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Jan;21(1):397-403. doi: 10.1007/s00784-016-1804-5. Epub 2016 Mar 28.

引用本文的文献

1
A Comparative Evaluation of Anesthetic Effectiveness of 4% Articaine vs 0.5% Bupivacaine for Lower Molar Tooth Extraction.4%阿替卡因与0.5%布比卡因用于下颌磨牙拔牙麻醉效果的比较评估
Cureus. 2022 Dec 16;14(12):e32611. doi: 10.7759/cureus.32611. eCollection 2022 Dec.