Sarfaraz Ifrah, Pascoal Selma, Macedo José Paulo, Salgado Abel, Rasheed Dil, Pereira Jorge
University Fernando Pessoa, Faculty of Health Sciences, Porto, Portugal.
University Institute of Health Sciences, IUCS-CESPU, Gandra PRD, Portugal.
J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2021 Aug;21(4):269-282. doi: 10.17245/jdapm.2021.21.4.269. Epub 2021 Jul 30.
This review aimed to assess and compare the outcomes of the anesthetic efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) and Gow-Gates mandibular nerve block (GGMNB) in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. A descriptive systematic review of quantitative research was conducted wherein the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA)" was adopted, and the Problem/Patient/Population, Intervention/Indicator, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) criteria were used to structure the research question. A literature search was performed using PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Ovid. Selection criteria were applied for populations over nine years of age, of either sex, with irreversible pulpitis, and articles published in English regarding conventional IANB or IANB and Gow-Gates techniques between 2009 and 2019. Prospective randomized clinical trials or randomized controlled trials were included in the review, in which anesthetic efficacy or success was measured. After screening, four articles were included. Three studies were randomized clinical trials, and two were randomized controlled trials. The validity and reliability of the individual studies were examined. There was evidence of the higher efficacy of the GGMNB technique than that of the IANB technique. However, both techniques can be mastered through training.
本综述旨在评估和比较下牙槽神经阻滞(IANB)和Gow-Gates下颌神经阻滞(GGMNB)对有症状的不可逆性牙髓炎患者的麻醉效果。对定量研究进行了描述性系统综述,采用了“系统评价的首选报告项目(PRISMA)”,并使用问题/患者/人群、干预/指标、对照、结果(PICO)标准来构建研究问题。使用PubMed/Medline、Cochrane图书馆、谷歌学术和Ovid进行文献检索。选择标准适用于9岁以上、任何性别、患有不可逆性牙髓炎的人群,以及2009年至2019年间发表的关于传统IANB或IANB与Gow-Gates技术的英文文章。本综述纳入了前瞻性随机临床试验或随机对照试验,其中测量了麻醉效果或成功率。筛选后,纳入了四篇文章。三项研究为随机临床试验,两项为随机对照试验。对各项研究的有效性和可靠性进行了检查。有证据表明GGMNB技术的效果高于IANB技术。然而,两种技术都可以通过训练掌握。