Robert Nist

Anesthetic efficacy of the supplemental intraosseous injection of 3% mepivacaine in irreversible pulpitis

OBJECTIVE To determine the efficacy of a supplemental intraosseous injection of 3% mepivacaine in mandibular posterior teeth with irreversible pulpitis. Intraosseous injection pain, subjective heart rate increase, and pain ratings during endodontic treatment were also assessed. STUDY DESIGN Forty-eight patients with irreversible pulpitis received conventional inferior alveolar nerve blocks. Electric pulp testing was used to determine pulpal anesthesia. Patients who were positive to the pulp testing, or negative to pulp testing but felt pain during endodontic treatment, received an intraosseous injection of 1.8 ml of 3% mepivacaine. A second intraosseous injection of 3% mepivacaine (1.8 ml) was given if the first injection was unsuccessful. RESULTS Seventy-five percent of patients required an initial intraosseous injection because of failure to gain pulpal anesthesia. The inferior alveolar block was 25% successful; the first intraosseous injection increased success to 80%. A second intraosseous injection further increased success to 98%. These differences were significant (p < 0.05). Eight percent (4/48) of the initial intraosseous injections resulted in solution being expressed into the oral cavity: these were considered technique failures. CONCLUSIONS For mandibular posterior teeth with irreversible pulpitis, a supplemental intraosseous injection of 3% mepivacaine increased anesthetic success. A second intraosseous injection, when necessary, further improved success.

Anesthetic Efficacy of the Intraosseous Injection after an Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block

The purpose of this study was to determine the contribution of the intraosseous (IO) injection to the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block in human first molars. Using a repeated-measures design, 40 subjects randomly received either a combination IAN block + IO injection (on the distal of the first molar) using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or an IAN block+mock IO injection (gingival penetration only) at two successive appointments. The first molar and adjacent teeth, and contralateral canine (+/-controls) were blindly tested with an Analytic Technology pulp tester at 2-min cycles for 60 min. An 80 reading was used as the criterion for pulpal anesthesia. One hundred percent of the subjects had lip numbness with the IAN block. For the first molar, anesthetic success, defined as achieving an 80 reading within 15 min and keeping this reading for 60 min, was 42% with the IAN and 90% with the IAN + IO. Anesthetic failure defined as never achieving two 80 readings during the 60 min was 32% with the IAN and 0% with the IAN + IO. The onset of anesthesia was immediate with the IO injection. Eighty percent of the subjects sampled had a subjective increase in heart rate with the IO injection. The IO injection and postinjection questionnaire recorded low pain ratings.

Anesthetic efficacy of the periodontal ligament injection after an inferior alveolar nerve block

The purpose of this study was to determine the contribution of the periodontal ligament injection (PDL) to the inferior aveolar nerve (IAN) block in human first molars. Using a repeated-measures design, 40 subjects randomly received a combination IAN block and PDL injections of the first molar using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and a combination IAN block and mock PDL injections (needle penetration only) at two successive appointments. The first molar and adjacent teeth, and contralateral canine (positive and negative controls) were blindly tested with an Analytic Technology pulp tester at 2-min cycles for 60 min. Profound anesthesia was defined as no subject response at an 80 reading. One hundred percent of the subjects had lip numbness with the IAN block. When the combination IAN/PDL injections were compared with the IAN block, the incidence of successful pulpal anesthesia (80 reading) was significantly greater for the combination injections through the first 23 min of pulp testing. However, after 23 min, there was no increase in anesthetic success by adding the PDL to the IAN injection. We concluded that adding the PDL injection to an IAN block increased the incidence of pulpal anesthesia for the first 23 min in the first molar.

An evaluation of the incisive nerve block and combination inferior alveolar and incisive nerve blocks in mandibular anesthesia

The purpose of this study was to measure the degree of anesthesia obtained with the incisive nerve block, the inferior alveolar nerve block and a combination of both injections in mandibular teeth. Using a repeated measures design, 40 subjects randomly received an incisive nerve block, a conventional inferior alveolar nerve block, or a combination inferior alveolar nerve block plus an incisive nerve block using either lidocaine or saline (control), at four successive appointments. The mandibular teeth and contralateral canine (+/- controls) were blindly tested with an Analytic Technology pulp tester at 4-min cycles for 60 min. An 80 reading indicated complete pulpal anesthesia. The incisive nerve block alone did not result in successful pulpal anesthesia in the central, lateral, first, and second molars. It was successful in the first and second premolars but the duration was approximately 30 min. The combination inferior alveolar nerve block plus incisive nerve block was successful in the first and second premolars, and enhanced anesthesia for the laterals and first molars.

Anesthetic efficacy of the intraosseous injection in maxillary and mandibular teeth

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to determine the anesthetic efficacy of the intraosseous injection as a primary technique in human maxillary and mandibular teeth. STUDY DESIGN Forty subjects received two sets of intraosseous injections with 1.8 ml of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine at two successive appointments. The experimental teeth consisted of 40 groups of maxillary and mandibular first molars and lateral incisors. Each experimental tooth and adjacent teeth were tested with an electric pulp tester at 4-minute cycles for 60 minutes. Anesthetic success was defined as no subject response to the maximum output of the pulp tester (80 reading) for two consecutive readings. RESULTS Anesthetic success occurred in 75% of mandibular first molars, in 93% of maxillary first molars, in 78% of mandibular lateral incisors, and in 90% of maxillary lateral incisors. Overall, for the intraosseous injection onset was immediate, the duration of pulpal anesthesia steadily declined over the 60 minutes, there was a 78% incidence of subjective increase in heart rate, the majority of the subjects had no pain or mild pain with perforation and solution deposition, and 3% of the subjects had slow healing perforation sites. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study indicate that the intraosseous injection may provide pulpal anesthesia in 75% to 93% of noninflamed teeth as a primary technique. However, the duration of pulpal anesthesia declines steadily over an hour.

The use of ultrasound for guiding needle placement for inferior alveolar nerve blocks

OBJECTIVE The degree of pulpal anesthesia obtained with an ultrasound-assisted inferior alveolar nerve block was compared to that obtained with a conventional inferior alveolar nerve block for mandibular teeth to determine whether needle placement assisted by ultrasound results in more successful anesthesia. STUDY DESIGN Through use of a repeated-measures design, each of 40 subjects randomly received an ultrasound-assisted inferior alveolar nerve block and a conventional inferior alveolar nerve block at 2 separate appointments. Mandibular anterior and posterior teeth were blindly tested by means of a pulp tester at 4-minute cycles for 60 minutes postinjection. Anesthesia was considered successful when 2 consecutive readings of 80 were obtained. RESULTS One hundred percent of the subjects had profound lip numbness with both the ultrasound-assisted inferior alveolar nerve block and the conventional inferior alveolar nerve block. For these 2 techniques, anesthetic success rates for individual teeth ranged from 38% to 92%. There were no significant differences (P > .05) between the 2 techniques. CONCLUSIONS It was concluded that accurate needle placement with ultrasound for the inferior alveolar nerve block did not result in more successful pulpal anesthesia in the mandible. Therefore, accuracy of needle placement is not the primary reason for pulpal anesthetic failure with this block.

Anesthetic efficacy of the intraosseous injection of 2% lidocaine (1:100,000 epinephrine) and 3% mepivacaine in mandibular first molars

OBJECTIVES This study compared the anesthetic efficacy of a primary intraosseous injection of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and 3% mepivacaine in human mandibular first molars. Injection pain and healing postoperatively were also assessed for the intraosseous injection. STUDY DESIGN With the use of a repeated-measures design, 42 subjects randomly received intraosseous injections of 1.8 ml of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or 1.8 ml of 3% mepivacaine in a double-blind manner at two successive appointments. The first molar and adjacent teeth were blindly tested with an electric pulp tester at 2-minute cycles for 60 minutes. Anesthetic success was defined as no subject response to the maximum output of the pulp tester (80 reading) for two consecutive readings. RESULTS Anesthetic success occurred in 74% of the first molars with 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and in 45% with 3% mepivacaine. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Overall, onset was rapid for the intraosseous injections, the duration of pulpal anesthesia steadily declined over the 60 minutes, the majority of the subjects had no pain or mild pain with perforation and solution deposition, and 5% of the subjects had delayed healing at the perforation sites. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study indicate that the primary intraosseous injection of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine is more successful and results in a longer duration of pulpal anesthesia as compared with 3% mepivacaine in noninflamed mandibular first molars. Most subjects reported no or mild pain during perforation and injection.

Anesthetic efficacy and heart rate effects of the supplemental intraosseous injection of 2% mepivacaine with 1:20,000 levonordefrin

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to determine the anesthetic efficacy and heart rate effects of a supplemental intraosseous injection of 2% mepivacaine with 1:20,000 levonordefrin. STUDY DESIGN Through use of a repeated-measures design, 40 subjects randomly received 3 combinations of injections at 3 separate appointments. The combinations were as follows: inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block (with 3% mepivacaine) + intraosseous injection of 1.8 mL of 2% mepivacaine with 1:20,000 levonordefrin; IAN block + intraosseous injection of 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (positive control); IAN block + mock intraosseous injection (negative control). Each first molar, second molar, and second premolar was blindly tested with a pulp tester at 2-minute cycles for 60 minutes after injection. Anesthesia was considered successful when 2 consecutive readings of 80 were obtained. Heart rate (pulse rate) was measured with a pulse oximeter. RESULTS One hundred percent of the subjects had lip numbness with the IAN block + intraosseous mock technique and IAN block + intraosseous techniques. The anesthetic success rates for IAN block + mock intraosseous injection, IAN block + intraosseous lidocaine, and IAN block + intraosseous mepivacaine, respectively, were as follows: 80%, 100%, and 100% for the first molar; 90%, 100%, and 100% for the second molar; 77%, 97%, and 97% for the second premolar. For the first molar and second premolar, the differences were significant (P< .05) when the intraosseous mepivacaine and lidocaine techniques were compared with the IAN block + mock intraosseous injection. There were no significant differences between the intraosseous mepivacaine and lidocaine techniques. Eighty percent of the subjects had a mean increase in heart rate of 23-24 beats per minute with the intraosseous injection of the mepivacaine and lidocaine solutions; there were no significant differences between results with the 2 solutions. CONCLUSIONS We concluded that intraosseous injection of 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or 2% mepivacaine with 1:20,000 levonordefrin, used to supplement an IAN block, significantly increased anesthetic success in first molars and second premolars. The 2 solutions were equivalent with regard to intraosseous anesthetic success rate, failure rate, and heart rate increase after IAN block.

An In Vivo Evaluation of the Efficacy of Ultrasound after Step-back Preparation in Mandibular Molars

This study histologically compared the in vivo debridement efficacy of the step-back preparation versus a step-back/ultrasound preparation in the mesial root canals of vital mandibular molars. Group 1 consisted of 17 teeth prepared with a step-back technique using intermittent irrigation with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite. Group 2 consisted of 17 teeth prepared with a step-back technique as in group 1 followed by 3 min of ultrasonic instrumentation per canal utilizing a #15 Endosonic file in an Enac unit set at 3.5. An additional 6 ml/canal of 5.25% sodium hypochlorite was used during the ultrasonic preparation. Eight uninstrumented mandibular molars served as histological controls. Following extraction and histological preparation, 0.2-microns cross-sections from the 1- to 3-mm apical levels of the canal and isthmus were evaluated for percentage of tissue removal using an Olympus CUE-2 Image Analysis System. Factorial analysis of variance indicated canal and isthmus cleanliness values were significantly higher, at all 11 apical levels, with the ultrasonic technique. Sample values at the 1-, 2-, and 3-mm levels for the step-back and step-back/ultrasonic techniques, respectively, were: canal, 64% versus 92%, 81% versus 97%, and 90% versus 99.9%; isthmus, 2% versus 46%, 15% versus 60%, and 16% versus 83%.

Pain Reduction in Untreated Irreversible Pulpitis Using an Intraosseous Injection of Depo-Medrol

The purpose of this prospective, double-blind, randomized study was to evaluate pain reduction using an intraosseous injection of slow-releasing methylprednisolone in teeth with irreversible pulpitis. Forty subjects presenting for emergency treatment completed the study. Each subject had a tooth with a clinical diagnosis of irreversible pulpitis with actively associated moderate to severe pain. After local anesthesia was attained, the subjects were randomly assigned to receive an intraosseous injection of either 1.0 ml of Depo-Medrol (40 mg) or 1.0 ml of sterile saline (control). No endodontic therapy was begun at the initial appointment. The subjects received ibuprofen and Tylenol #3 and completed a 7-day questionnaire on pain, percussion pain, and analgesic medications taken each day. Over the 7-day observation period, the subjects who received the intraosseous injection of Depo-Medrol reported significantly (p < 0.05) less pain and percussion pain while taking significantly (p < 0.05) fewer pain medications. Clinically the intraosseous injection of Depo-Medrol could be used to temporarily alleviate the symptoms of irreversible pulpitis until definitive treatment can be rendered.