Suppr超能文献

阿替卡因无针麻醉与传统麻醉用于恒牙不可逆性牙髓炎根管治疗的比较:关于麻醉效果及疼痛影响的前瞻性研究

Articaine Needle - Free Anesthesia Vs Conventional Anesthesia in Root Canal Treatment of Irreversible Pulpitis in Permanent Teeth: A Prospective Study on Anesthetic Efficacy and Effects on Pain.

作者信息

Qian Suhui, Meng Ziying, Zhang Haiyan, Li Kaicheng, Zhang Fei, Zhang Sen, Liu Jianfei, Zhou Zhou

机构信息

Department of Stomatology, Huaibei People's Hospital, Huaibei, Anhui, People's Republic of China.

Stomatology Department of Suixi County Hospital, Huaibei, Anhui, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

J Pain Res. 2025 Apr 21;18:2115-2125. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S514944. eCollection 2025.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the anesthetic efficacy of articaine needle-free anesthesia with conventional lidocaine nerve block anesthesia for root canal treatment in permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis.

METHODS

In this prospective clinical trial, 94 patients were randomly allocated to receive either articaine needle-free anesthesia (n=47) or lidocaine nerve block anesthesia (n=47). Anesthetic effectiveness was evaluated through onset time, success rate, and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores during crown opening and pulp removal procedures. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic stability (heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure) and incidence of adverse reactions.

RESULTS

The articaine group exhibited significantly faster anesthesia onset (7.62±1.28 minutes vs 9.35±2.04 minutes, p<0.05) and higher success rate (93.62% vs 80.85%, p<0.05). Patients receiving articaine reported significantly lower pain scores during crown opening (4.31±1.13 vs 5.48±1.06) and pulp removal (3.18±1.07 vs 4.26±1.12) (both p<0.05). Both groups maintained comparable hemodynamic stability throughout the procedure (p>0.05), with no significant difference in adverse reaction rates (11.49% vs 10.64%, p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Articaine needle-free anesthesia demonstrates superior clinical performance compared to conventional lidocaine nerve block, offering faster onset, improved success rate, and enhanced pain control during root canal treatment of irreversible pulpitis, while maintaining equivalent safety parameters. These findings support its adoption as an effective alternative for dental anesthesia in endodontic procedures.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较阿替卡因无针麻醉与传统利多卡因神经阻滞麻醉用于恒牙不可逆性牙髓炎根管治疗时的麻醉效果。

方法

在这项前瞻性临床试验中,94例患者被随机分为两组,分别接受阿替卡因无针麻醉(n = 47)或利多卡因神经阻滞麻醉(n = 47)。通过麻醉起效时间、成功率以及开髓和拔髓过程中的视觉模拟量表(VAS)疼痛评分来评估麻醉效果。次要观察指标包括血流动力学稳定性(心率、收缩压和舒张压)和不良反应发生率。

结果

阿替卡因组的麻醉起效明显更快(7.62±1.28分钟 vs 9.35±2.04分钟,p<0.05),成功率更高(93.62% vs 80.85%,p<0.05)。接受阿替卡因麻醉的患者在开髓(4.31±1.13 vs 5.48±1.06)和拔髓(3.18±1.07 vs 4.26±1.12)过程中的疼痛评分显著更低(均p<0.05)。两组在整个手术过程中保持了相当的血流动力学稳定性(p>0.05),不良反应发生率无显著差异(11.49% vs 10.64%,p>0.05)。

结论

与传统利多卡因神经阻滞麻醉相比,阿替卡因无针麻醉表现出更优的临床性能,在不可逆性牙髓炎根管治疗中起效更快、成功率更高、疼痛控制更好,同时保持了相当的安全性参数。这些研究结果支持将其作为牙髓治疗中牙科麻醉的有效替代方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4b63/12024466/e44f025aa3bd/JPR-18-2115-g0001.jpg

相似文献

2
Injectable local anaesthetic agents for dental anaesthesia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jul 10;7(7):CD006487. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006487.pub2.

本文引用的文献

1
[A preliminary study on the short-term effectiveness and safety of sublingual immunotherapy-spray for patients with respiratory allergy].
Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2024 Dec 6;58(12):1921-1925. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112150-20240921-00761.
3
Comparative Analysis of Post-operative Pain Relief and Healing Outcomes between Single-Visit and Multiple-Visit Root Canal Therapy: A Tertiary Care Study.
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Jul;16(Suppl 3):S2388-S2390. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_281_24. Epub 2024 Jun 7.
5
[One-way membrane decompression for vital pulp therapy in irreversible pulpitis: a case report].
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2024 Jan 9;59(1):85-88. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20230912-00154.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验