Cargando…

Comparison of the Anaesthesia Success Rate in Maxillary First and Second Molars with 3% Prilocaine as the Anaesthetic Agent

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the success rate of anaesthesia with 3% prilocaine and felypressin (0.03 IU/mL) in maxillary first and second molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis. METHODS: The study population was 159 patients (53 males, 106 females) who had maxillary first or seco...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: PARIROKH, Masoud, SAMADI, Iman, NAKHAEE, Nouzar, ABBOTT, Paul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Carol Davila University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842433/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34967341
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2021.74755
_version_ 1784651048793669632
author PARIROKH, Masoud
SAMADI, Iman
NAKHAEE, Nouzar
ABBOTT, Paul
author_facet PARIROKH, Masoud
SAMADI, Iman
NAKHAEE, Nouzar
ABBOTT, Paul
author_sort PARIROKH, Masoud
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the success rate of anaesthesia with 3% prilocaine and felypressin (0.03 IU/mL) in maxillary first and second molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis. METHODS: The study population was 159 patients (53 males, 106 females) who had maxillary first or second molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis (84 first molars, 75 second molars). A buccal infiltration of 3% prilocaine with 0.03 IU/mL felypressin was used as the primary anaesthetic technique. In addition to using a categorised pain score, sound, eye movement and body motion were considered signs of anaesthesia efficacy. The data were analysed with independent t and Chi-square tests. Significance was set at α=0.05. RESULTS: Overall, the success rate was 56.6% in maxillary molars, 53.6% in maxillary first molars, and 60% in maxillary second molars. There was no statistically significant difference between maxillary first and second molars in terms of anaesthesia success rate (P>0.05). The overall success rate of intraligament supplementary injections was 50%, and intrapulpal supplementary injections was 97.91%. No significant difference was found between maxillary first and second molars in terms of the success rate of the supplemental techniques (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: No significant difference was found between maxillary first and second molars in terms of anaesthesia success rate when 3% prilocaine with 0.03 IU/mL felypressin was used as an anaesthetic solution for the infiltration injection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8842433
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Carol Davila University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88424332022-02-28 Comparison of the Anaesthesia Success Rate in Maxillary First and Second Molars with 3% Prilocaine as the Anaesthetic Agent PARIROKH, Masoud SAMADI, Iman NAKHAEE, Nouzar ABBOTT, Paul Eur Endod J Original Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the success rate of anaesthesia with 3% prilocaine and felypressin (0.03 IU/mL) in maxillary first and second molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis. METHODS: The study population was 159 patients (53 males, 106 females) who had maxillary first or second molar teeth with irreversible pulpitis (84 first molars, 75 second molars). A buccal infiltration of 3% prilocaine with 0.03 IU/mL felypressin was used as the primary anaesthetic technique. In addition to using a categorised pain score, sound, eye movement and body motion were considered signs of anaesthesia efficacy. The data were analysed with independent t and Chi-square tests. Significance was set at α=0.05. RESULTS: Overall, the success rate was 56.6% in maxillary molars, 53.6% in maxillary first molars, and 60% in maxillary second molars. There was no statistically significant difference between maxillary first and second molars in terms of anaesthesia success rate (P>0.05). The overall success rate of intraligament supplementary injections was 50%, and intrapulpal supplementary injections was 97.91%. No significant difference was found between maxillary first and second molars in terms of the success rate of the supplemental techniques (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: No significant difference was found between maxillary first and second molars in terms of anaesthesia success rate when 3% prilocaine with 0.03 IU/mL felypressin was used as an anaesthetic solution for the infiltration injection. Carol Davila University Press 2021-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8842433/ /pubmed/34967341 http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2021.74755 Text en ©2021 European Endodontic Journal https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
PARIROKH, Masoud
SAMADI, Iman
NAKHAEE, Nouzar
ABBOTT, Paul
Comparison of the Anaesthesia Success Rate in Maxillary First and Second Molars with 3% Prilocaine as the Anaesthetic Agent
title Comparison of the Anaesthesia Success Rate in Maxillary First and Second Molars with 3% Prilocaine as the Anaesthetic Agent
title_full Comparison of the Anaesthesia Success Rate in Maxillary First and Second Molars with 3% Prilocaine as the Anaesthetic Agent
title_fullStr Comparison of the Anaesthesia Success Rate in Maxillary First and Second Molars with 3% Prilocaine as the Anaesthetic Agent
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Anaesthesia Success Rate in Maxillary First and Second Molars with 3% Prilocaine as the Anaesthetic Agent
title_short Comparison of the Anaesthesia Success Rate in Maxillary First and Second Molars with 3% Prilocaine as the Anaesthetic Agent
title_sort comparison of the anaesthesia success rate in maxillary first and second molars with 3% prilocaine as the anaesthetic agent
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842433/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34967341
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2021.74755
work_keys_str_mv AT parirokhmasoud comparisonoftheanaesthesiasuccessrateinmaxillaryfirstandsecondmolarswith3prilocaineastheanaestheticagent
AT samadiiman comparisonoftheanaesthesiasuccessrateinmaxillaryfirstandsecondmolarswith3prilocaineastheanaestheticagent
AT nakhaeenouzar comparisonoftheanaesthesiasuccessrateinmaxillaryfirstandsecondmolarswith3prilocaineastheanaestheticagent
AT abbottpaul comparisonoftheanaesthesiasuccessrateinmaxillaryfirstandsecondmolarswith3prilocaineastheanaestheticagent