2013-12-05T11:51:19Z
2013-12-05T11:51:19Z
2012-03-01
2013-12-05T11:51:19Z
Objectives: To compare the clinical anesthetic efficacy of 0.5% bupivacaine and 4% articaine (both with 1:200.000 adrenaline) for anterior maxillary infiltration in healthy volunteers. Material and methods: A triple-blind split-mouth randomized clinical trial was carried out in 20 volunteers. A supraperiosteal buccal injection of 0.9 ml of either solution at the apex of the lateral incisor was done in 2 appointments separated 2 weeks apart. The following outcome variables were measured: latency time, anesthetic efficacy (dental pulp, keratinized gingiva, alveolar mucosa and upper lip mucosa and tissue) and the duration of anesthetic effect. Hemodynamic parameters were monitored during the procedure. Results: Latency time recorded was similar for both anesthetic solutions (p>0.05). No statistically significant differences were found in terms of anesthetic efficacy for dental pulp, keratinized gingiva or alveolar mucosa. Articaine had a significant higher proportion of successful anesthesia at 10 minutes after infiltration in lip mucosa and lip skin (p=0.039). The duration of anesthesia was 336 minutes for bupivacaine and 167 minutes for articaine. (p<0.001). No significant hemodynamic alterations were noted during the procedure. Conclusions: Articaine and bupivacaine exhibited similar anesthetic efficacy for maxillary infiltrations. The duration of anesthesia was longer with the bupivacaine solution, but lip anesthesia was better with articaine
Article
Published version
English
Maxil·lars; Anestèsia en odontologia; Injeccions; Anestèsia local; Amides; Jaws; Anesthesia in dentistry; Injections; Local anesthesia; Amides
Medicina Oral SL
Reproducció del document publicat a: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.4317/medoral.17476
Medicina Oral, Patología Oral y Cirugia Bucal, 2012, vol. 17, num. 2, p. 325-330
http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.4317/medoral.17476
(c) Medicina Oral SL, 2012