A prospective, randomized, triple-blind comparison of articaine and bupivacaine for maxillary infiltrations
NAGIOS: RODERIC FUNCIONANDO

A prospective, randomized, triple-blind comparison of articaine and bupivacaine for maxillary infiltrations

DSpace Repository

A prospective, randomized, triple-blind comparison of articaine and bupivacaine for maxillary infiltrations

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Vílchez Pérez, Miguel Angel es
dc.contributor.author Sancho Puchades, Manuel es
dc.contributor.author Valmaseda Castellón, E. es
dc.contributor.author Paredes García, Jordi es
dc.contributor.author Berini Aytés, Leonardo es
dc.contributor.author Gay Escoda, Cosme es
dc.date.accessioned 2017-07-25T12:12:29Z
dc.date.available 2017-07-25T12:12:29Z
dc.date.issued 2012 es
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10550/60001
dc.description.abstract Objectives: To compare the clinical anesthetic efficacy of 0.5% bupivacaine and 4% articaine (both with 1:200.000 adrenaline) for anterior maxillary infiltration in healthy volunteers. Material and methods: A triple-blind split-mouth randomized clinical trial was carried out in 20 volunteers. A supraperiosteal buccal injection of 0.9 ml of either solution at the apex of the lateral incisor was done in 2 appointments separated 2 weeks apart. The following outcome variables were measured: latency time, anesthetic efficacy (dental pulp, keratinized gingiva, alveolar mucosa and upper lip mucosa and tissue) and the duration of anesthetic effect. Hemodynamic parameters were monitored during the procedure. Results: Latency time recorded was similar for both anesthetic solutions (p>0.05). No statistically significant differences were found in terms of anesthetic efficacy for dental pulp, keratinized gingiva or alveolar mucosa. Articaine had a significant higher proportion of successful anesthesia at 10 minutes after infiltration in lip mucosa and lip skin (p=0.039). The duration of anesthesia was 336 minutes for bupivacaine and 167 minutes for articaine. (p<0.001). No significant hemodynamic alterations were noted during the procedure. Conclusions: Articaine and bupivacaine exhibited similar anesthetic efficacy for maxillary infiltrations. The duration of anesthesia was longer with the bupivacaine solution, but lip anesthesia was better with articaine. © Medicina Oral. es
dc.source Vílchez Pérez, Miguel Angel ; Sancho Puchades, Manuel ; Valmaseda Castellón, E. ; Paredes García, Jordi ; Berini Aytés, Leonardo ; Gay Escoda, Cosme. A prospective, randomized, triple-blind comparison of articaine and bupivacaine for maxillary infiltrations. En: Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal. Ed. inglesa, 17 2 2012: 6- es
dc.title A prospective, randomized, triple-blind comparison of articaine and bupivacaine for maxillary infiltrations es
dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/article en
dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion en
dc.subject.unesco UNESCO::CIENCIAS MÉDICAS es
dc.identifier.doi 10.4317/medoral.17476 es

View       (866.0Kb)

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace

Advanced Search

Browse

Statistics