Cargando…

Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study

Objective: To compare a computerized intraosseous anesthesia system with the conventional oral anesthesia techniques, and analyze the latency and duration of the anesthetic effect and patient preference. Design: A simple-blind prospective study was made between March 2007 and May 2008. Each patient...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beneito-Brotons, Rut, Peñarrocha-Oltra, David, Ata-Ali, Javier, Peñarrocha, María
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3476101/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22143722
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.17543
_version_ 1782247045790171136
author Beneito-Brotons, Rut
Peñarrocha-Oltra, David
Ata-Ali, Javier
Peñarrocha, María
author_facet Beneito-Brotons, Rut
Peñarrocha-Oltra, David
Ata-Ali, Javier
Peñarrocha, María
author_sort Beneito-Brotons, Rut
collection PubMed
description Objective: To compare a computerized intraosseous anesthesia system with the conventional oral anesthesia techniques, and analyze the latency and duration of the anesthetic effect and patient preference. Design: A simple-blind prospective study was made between March 2007 and May 2008. Each patient was subjected to two anesthetic techniques: conventional and intraosseous using the Quicksleeper® system (DHT, Cholet, France). A split-mouth design was adopted in which each patient underwent treatment of a tooth with one of the techniques, and treatment of the homologous contralateral tooth with the other technique. The treatments consisted of restorations, endodontic procedures and simple extractions. Results: The study series comprised 12 females and 18 males with a mean age of 36.8 years. The 30 subjects underwent a total of 60 anesthetic procedures. Intraosseous and conventional oral anesthesia caused discomfort during administration in 46.3% and 32.1% of the patients, respectively. The latency was 7.1±2.23 minutes for the conventional technique and 0.48±0.32 for intraosseous anesthesia – the difference being statistically significant. The depth of the anesthetic effect was sufficient to allow the patients to tolerate the dental treatments. The duration of the anesthetic effect in soft tissues was 199.3 minutes with the conventional technique versus only 1.6 minutes with intraosseous anesthesia – the difference between the two techniques being statistically significant. Most of the patients (69.7%) preferred intraosseous anesthesia. Conclusions: The described intraosseous anesthetic system is effective, with a much shorter latency than the conventional technique, sufficient duration of anesthesia to perform the required dental treatments, and with a much lesser soft tissue anesthetic effect. Most of the patients preferred intraosseous anesthesia. Key words:Anesthesia, intraosseous, oral anesthesia, infiltrating, mandibular block, Quicksleeper®.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3476101
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34761012012-10-19 Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study Beneito-Brotons, Rut Peñarrocha-Oltra, David Ata-Ali, Javier Peñarrocha, María Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Research-Article Objective: To compare a computerized intraosseous anesthesia system with the conventional oral anesthesia techniques, and analyze the latency and duration of the anesthetic effect and patient preference. Design: A simple-blind prospective study was made between March 2007 and May 2008. Each patient was subjected to two anesthetic techniques: conventional and intraosseous using the Quicksleeper® system (DHT, Cholet, France). A split-mouth design was adopted in which each patient underwent treatment of a tooth with one of the techniques, and treatment of the homologous contralateral tooth with the other technique. The treatments consisted of restorations, endodontic procedures and simple extractions. Results: The study series comprised 12 females and 18 males with a mean age of 36.8 years. The 30 subjects underwent a total of 60 anesthetic procedures. Intraosseous and conventional oral anesthesia caused discomfort during administration in 46.3% and 32.1% of the patients, respectively. The latency was 7.1±2.23 minutes for the conventional technique and 0.48±0.32 for intraosseous anesthesia – the difference being statistically significant. The depth of the anesthetic effect was sufficient to allow the patients to tolerate the dental treatments. The duration of the anesthetic effect in soft tissues was 199.3 minutes with the conventional technique versus only 1.6 minutes with intraosseous anesthesia – the difference between the two techniques being statistically significant. Most of the patients (69.7%) preferred intraosseous anesthesia. Conclusions: The described intraosseous anesthetic system is effective, with a much shorter latency than the conventional technique, sufficient duration of anesthesia to perform the required dental treatments, and with a much lesser soft tissue anesthetic effect. Most of the patients preferred intraosseous anesthesia. Key words:Anesthesia, intraosseous, oral anesthesia, infiltrating, mandibular block, Quicksleeper®. Medicina Oral S.L. 2012-05 2011-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3476101/ /pubmed/22143722 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.17543 Text en Copyright: © 2012 Medicina Oral S.L. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research-Article
Beneito-Brotons, Rut
Peñarrocha-Oltra, David
Ata-Ali, Javier
Peñarrocha, María
Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study
title Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study
title_full Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study
title_fullStr Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study
title_full_unstemmed Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study
title_short Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: A preliminary study
title_sort intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: a preliminary study
topic Research-Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3476101/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22143722
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.17543
work_keys_str_mv AT beneitobrotonsrut intraosseousanesthesiawithsolutioninjectioncontrolledbyacomputerizedsystemversusconventionaloralanesthesiaapreliminarystudy
AT penarrochaoltradavid intraosseousanesthesiawithsolutioninjectioncontrolledbyacomputerizedsystemversusconventionaloralanesthesiaapreliminarystudy
AT ataalijavier intraosseousanesthesiawithsolutioninjectioncontrolledbyacomputerizedsystemversusconventionaloralanesthesiaapreliminarystudy
AT penarrochamaria intraosseousanesthesiawithsolutioninjectioncontrolledbyacomputerizedsystemversusconventionaloralanesthesiaapreliminarystudy