Cargando…
Volume and effectiveness assessment of articain 4% versus mepivacaine 2% used in third molar surgery: randomized, double-blind, split-mouth controlled clinical trial
BACKGROUND: The different indications for extraction of the lower third molars, require resources to manage pain and discomfort, such as, for example, adequate anesthetic techniques, and the type of anesthetic used can influence the management of pain in tooth extractions. Few studies in the literat...
Autores principales: | de Almeida, Paula Carolina, Raldi, Fernando Vagner, Sato, Fábio Ricardo Loureiro, Nascimento, Rodrigo Dias, de Moraes, Michelle Bianchi |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medicina Oral S.L.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7648918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32701928 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.23780 |
Ejemplares similares
-
Articaine and mepivacaine buccal infiltration in securing mandibular first molar pulp anesthesia following mepivacaine inferior alveolar nerve block: A randomized, double-blind crossover study
por: Gazal, Giath, et al.
Publicado: (2015) -
Is Articaine More Potent than Mepivacaine for Use in Oral Surgery?
por: Gazal, Giath
Publicado: (2018) -
Comparative split-mouth study of the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 0.5% bupivacaine in impacted mandibular third molar extraction
por: Pellicer-Chover, Hilario, et al.
Publicado: (2013) -
Combination of Articaine and Ketamine V/S Articaine Alone After Surgical Extraction of Impacted Third Molars
por: Dubey, Tushar, et al.
Publicado: (2020) -
Comparison of lidocaine with articaine buccal injection in reducing complications following impacted mandibular third molar surgery: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial
por: Naghipour, Amin, et al.
Publicado: (2020)