Abstract

Background: The pain caused by the injection of local anesthetic has been reported as one of the main complaints of dental patients. Topical anesthetics are widely used drugs in dentistry, mainly to control pain associated with the needle penetration in the administration of local anesthesia. Objective: The present study aimed to evaluate (5%,7.5% and 10%) concentrations of lidocaine/prilocaine agent, compared to the common 10% lidocaine hydrochloride spray in the oral cavity. Materials and Methods: This was a split-mouth double-blind, randomized clinical trial pilot study. We randomized 15 patients, ages 35 to 64 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists I and II with severe chronic periodontitis who were referred to the dental clinic for surgery, to receive 4 topical anesthetics (5%, 7.5%, and 10%) lidocaine prilocaine emulsion and 10% lidocaine hydrochloride topical anesthetic agent before local infiltration. Primary outcomes were assessing drug safety and pain level that measured by assessment of visual analog scale (VAS) scores of pain during LA injection in the first premolar and second molar in each maxillary quadrant in 15 patients corresponding to the posterior superior alveolar nerve (PSA) and secondary outcome was the relationship between age and gender regarding pain perception, and a total of 60 regions were analyzed. Results: Results revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between lidocaine hydrochloride and (5%,7.5% and 10%) lidocaine prilocaine in terms of pain reduction when the 4 different compounds were compared. According to Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and Friedman test, the age and gender of the patients had an insignificant correlation with the anesthetic effects of the four studied solutions. Conclusion: Based on these results, age and gender have insignificant effects on the pain scores and it can be said that the four solutions do not have significant differences regarding their anesthetic effects; also, we did not find any adverse reactions by using 7.5% and 10% lidocaine/prilocaine agent.

Highlights

  • The pain caused by the injection of local anesthetic has been reported as one of the main complaints of dental patients.Topical anesthetics are widely used drugs in dentistry, mainly to control pain associated with the needle penetration in the administration of local anesthesia

  • Based on these results, age and gender have insignificant effects on the pain scores and it can be said that the four solutions do not have significant differences regarding their anesthetic effects; we did not find any adverse reactions by using 7.5% and 10% lidocaine/prilocaine agent

  • It was observed that the reported visual analog scale (VAS) was at least 7.5% EMLA (0.80±1.01) topical anesthesia

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The pain caused by the injection of local anesthetic has been reported as one of the main complaints of dental patients.Topical anesthetics are widely used drugs in dentistry, mainly to control pain associated with the needle penetration in the administration of local anesthesia. It has been reported that EMLA cream can sometimes lead to regional pallor, flare, edema, an early burning sensation, and rare itching. It may induce allergic and anaphylactic reactions, including hives, vascular edema, bronchospasms, and shock. Topical anesthetics have little side effects with easy administration and reduce pain caused by needle injections and can generate positive responses towards dental treatment in patients [1, 5]. The pain caused by the injection of local anesthetic has been reported as one of the main complaints of dental patients.

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.