Top

Head & Face Medicine

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

Evaluation of the anesthetic effect of epinephrine-free articaine and mepivacaine through quantitative sensory testing

Authors: Sareh Said Yekta-Michael, Jamal M Stein, Ernst Marioth-Wirtz

Published in: Head & Face Medicine | Issue 1/2015

Abstract

Introduction

Long lasting anesthesia of the soft tissue beyond the dental treatment affects patients in daily routine. Therefore a sophisticated local anesthesia is needed. The purpose of this study was an evaluation of the clinical use of epinephrine-free local anesthetic solutions in routine short-time dental treatments.

Materials and methods

In a prospective, single-blind, non-randomized and controlled clinical trial, 31 patients (16 male, 15 female patients) undergoing short-time dental treatment under local anesthesia (plain solutions of articaine 4% and mepivacaine 3%) in area of maxillary canine were tested with quantitative sensory testing QST. Paired-Wilcoxon-testing (signed-rank-test) and Mc Nemar tests have been used for statistical results.

Results

Significant differences in all tested parameters to the time of measurements were found. Mepivacaine showed a significantly stronger impact for the whole period of measurement (128 min) on thermal and mechanical test parameters and to the associated nerve fibers.

Conclusion

Plain articaine shows a faster onset of action associated with a shorter time of activity in comparison to plain mepivacaine. In addition to this articaine shows a significant low-graded effect on the tested nerve-fibers and therefore a least affected anesthesia to the patient. The clinical use of an epinephrine-free anesthetic solution can be stated as possible option in short dental routine treatments to the frequently used vasoconstrictor containing local anesthetics. Patients may benefit from shorter numbness.

Malamed SF, Sykes P, Kubota Y, Matsuura H, Lipp M. Local anesthesia: a review. Anesth Pain Control Dent. 1992;1(1):11–24.PubMed

Meechan JG. Pain control in local analgesia. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2009;10(2):71–6.PubMed

Jeske AJ, Blanton PL. Selection of local anesthetics in dentistry: clinical impression versus scientific assessment. J Am Coll Dent. 2006;73(3):21–4.PubMed

Daubländer M, Kämmerer PW, Willershausen B, Leckel M, Lauer HC, Buff S, et al. Clinical use of an epinephrine-reduced (1/400,000) articaine solution in short-time dental routine treatments-a multicenter study. Clin Oral Investig. 2011;16(4):1289–95.PubMed

Davenport RE, Porcelli RJ, Iacono VJ, Bonura CF, Mallis GI, Baer PN. Effects of anesthetics containing epinephrine on catecholamine levels during periodontal surgery. J Periodontol. 1990;61(9):553–8.PubMed

Heavner JE. Local anesthetics. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2007;20(4):336–42.PubMed

Hogan QH. Pathophysiology of peripheral nerve injury during regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2008;33(5):435–41.PubMedPubMedCentral

Laragnoit AB, Neves RS, Neves IL, Vieira JE. Locoregional anesthesia for dental treatment in cardiac patients: a comparative study of 2% plain lidocaine and 2% lidocaine with epinephrine (1:100,000). Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2009;64(3):177–82.

Meechan JG. Local anaesthesia: risks and controversies. Dent Update. 2009;36(5):278–80.PubMed

10.

O'Malley TP, Postma GN, Holtel M, Girod DA. Effect of local epinephrine on cutaneous bloodflow in the human neck. Laryngoscope. 1995;105(2):140–3.PubMed

11.

Sader R. Lokalanästhesie, hämorrhagische Diathesen und medikamentöse Therapie. MKG-Chirurg. 2009;2:125–41.

12.

Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. Efficacy of articaine: a new amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000;131(5):635–42.PubMed

13.

Winther JE, Patirupanusara B. Evaluation of carticaine - a new local analgesic. Int J Oral Surg. 1974;3(6):422–7.PubMed

14.

Kämmerer PW, Palarie V, Daubländer M, Bicer C, Shabazfar N, Brüllmann D, et al. Comparison of 4% articaine with epinephrine (1:100,000) and without epinephrine in inferior alveolar block for tooth extraction: double-blind randomized clinical trial of anesthetic efficacy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;113(4):495–9.

15.

Cowan A. Clinical assessment of a new local anesthetic agent-carticaine. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1977;43(2):174–80.PubMed

16.

Willatts DG, Reynolds F. Comparison of the vasoactivity of amide and ester local anaesthetics. An intradermal study. Br J Anaesth. 1985;57(10):1006–11.PubMed

17.

Mücke M, Cuhls H, Radbruch L, Baron R, Maier C, Tölle T, et al. Quantitative sensory testing. Schmerz. 2014;28(6):635–48.PubMed

18.

Rolke R, Magerl W, Campbell KA, Schalber C, Caspari S, Birklein F, et al. Quantitative sensory testing: a comprehensive protocol for clinical trial. Eur J Pain. 2006;10(1):77–88.PubMed

19.

Said-Yekta S, Smeets R, Esteves-Oliveira M, Stein JM, Riediger D, Lampert F. Verification of nerve integrity after surgical intervention using quantitative sensory testing. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;70(2):263–71.PubMed

20.

Yekta SS, Koch F, Grosjean MB, Esteves-Oliveira M, Stein JM, Ghassemi A, Riediger D, Lampert F, Smeets R. Analysis of trigeminal nerve disorders after oral and maxillofacial intervention. Head Face Med. 2010 Oct 26;6:24. doi:10.1186/1746-160X-6-24.

21.

Yekta SS, Lückhoff A, Ristić D, Lampert F, Ellrich J. Impaired somatosensation in tongue mucosa of smokers. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16(1):39–44.PubMed

22.

Ellrich J, Ristic D, Yekta SS. Impaired thermal perception in cluster headache. J Neurol. 2006;253(10):1292–9.PubMed

23.

Svensson P, Baad-Hansen L, Thygesen T, Juhl GI, Jensen TS. Overview on tools and methods to assess neuropathic trigeminal pain. J Orofac Pain. 2004;18(4):332–8.PubMed

24.

Yekta SS, Smeets R, Stein JM, Ellrich J. Assessment of trigeminal nerve functions by quantitative sensory testing in patients and healthy volunteers. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(10):2437–51.PubMed

25.

Becker DE, Reed KL. Local anesthetics: review of pharmacological considerations. Anesth Prog. 2012;59(2):90–101.PubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Gopikrishna V, Pradeep G, Venkateshbabu N. Assessment of pulp vitality: a review. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2009;19(1):3–15.PubMed

27.

Gibson S, Farrell M. A review of age differences in the neurophysiology of nociception and the perceptual experience of pain. Clinic J Pain. 2004;20(4)227–39. Review

28.

Heft M, Cooper B, O’Brian K, Hemp E, O’Brian R. Aging effects on the perception of noxious and non-noxious thermal stimuli applied to the face. Aging (Milano). 1996;8:35–41.

29.

Matos R, Wang K, Jensen JD, Jensen T, Neuman B, Svensson P, et al. Quantitative sensory testing in the trigeminal region: site and gender differences. J Orofac Pain. 2011;25(2):161–9.PubMed

30.

Becker DE, Reed KL. Essentials of local anesthetic pharmacology. Anesth Prog. 2006;53(3):98–108.PubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Chong PS, Cros DP. Technology literature review: quantitative sensory testing. Muscle Nerve. 2004;29(5):734–47.PubMed

32.

Lima-Júnior JL, Dias-Ribeiro E, de Araújo TN, Ferreira-Rocha J, Honfi-Júnior ES, Sarmento CF, Seabra FR, de Sousa Mdo S. Evaluation of the buccal vestibule-palatal diffusion of 4% articaine hydrochloride in impacted maxillary third molar extractions, Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2009;1;14(3):E129-32.

33.

Oertel R, Rahn R, Kirch W. Clinical pharmacokinetics of articaine. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1997;33(6):417–25.PubMed

34.

Vree TB, Gielen MJ. Clinical pharmacology and the use of articaine for local and regional anaesthesia. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2005;19(2):293–308.PubMed

35.

Potocnik I, Tomsic M, Sketelj J, Bajrovic FF. Articaine is more effective than lidocaine or mepivacaine in rat sensory nerve conduction block in vitro. J Dent Res. 2006;85(2):162–6.PubMed

36.

Muschaweck R, Rippel R. A new local anesthetic (carticaine) from the thiopene-series. Prakt Anaesth. 1974;9(3):135–46.PubMed

37.

Winther JE, Nathalang B. Effectivity of a new local analgesic Hoe 40 045. Scand J Dent Res. 1972;80(4):272–8.PubMed

38.

Sommer S, Fruhstorfer H, Nolte H. Comparative studies of the local anaesthetic action of carticaine 1% and mepivacaine 1%. Anaesthesist. 1978;27(7):65–8.PubMed

39.

Rahn R, Hauzeneder W, Flanze L. Efficiency of a 2% epinephrine-free Articain solution (Ultracain 2%) for dental local anesthesia. Dtsch Stomatol. 1991;41(10):379–82.PubMed

40.

Evans G, Nusstein J, Drum M, Reader A, Beck M. A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of articaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltrations. J Endod. 2008;34(4):389–93.PubMed

41.

Moore PA, Boynes SG, Hersh EV, DeRossi SS, Sollecito TP, Goodson JM, et al. The anesthetic efficacy of 4 percent articaine 1:200,000 epinephrine: two controlled clinical trials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137(11):1572–81.PubMed

42.

Srinivasan N, Kavitha M, Loganathan CS, Padmini G. Comparison of anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine for maxillary buccal infiltration in patients with irreversible pulpitis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107(1):133–6.PubMed

43.

Tortamano IP, Siviero M, Costa CG, Buscariolo IA, Armonia PL. A comparison of the anesthetic efficacy of articaine and lidocaine in patients with irreversible pulpitis. J Endod. 2009;35(2):165–8.PubMed

44.

Gokin AP, Philip B, Strichartz GR. Preferential block of small myelinated sensory and motor fibers by lidocaine: in vivo electrophysiology in the rat sciatic nerve. Anesthesiology. 2001;95(6):1441–54.PubMed

45.

Rosenberg PH, Heinonen E. Differential sensitivity of A and C nerve fibres to long-acting amide local anaesthetics. Br J Anaesth. 1983;55(2):163–7.PubMed

46.

Sakai T, Tomiyasu S, Yamada H, Ono T, Sumikawa K. Quantitative and selective evaluation of differential sensory nerve block after transdermal lidocaine. Anesth Analg. 2004;98(1):248–51.PubMed

Title: Evaluation of the anesthetic effect of epinephrine-free articaine and mepivacaine through quantitative sensory testing
Authors: Sareh Said Yekta-Michael
Jamal M Stein
Ernst Marioth-Wirtz
Publication date: 01-12-2015
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Head & Face Medicine / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1746-160X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-015-0061-1

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Evaluation of the anesthetic effect of epinephrine-free articaine and mepivacaine through quantitative sensory testing

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Enamel surface alterations after repeated conditioning with HCl

Analysis of angiogenic markers in oral squamous cell carcinoma-gene and protein expression

Reconstruction of facial defects with local flaps – a training model for medical students?

Evaluation of the neurovascular bundle position at the palate with cone beam computed tomography: an observational study

Current concepts and future of noninvasive procedures for diagnosing oral squamous cell carcinoma - a systematic review

Reviewer acknowledgement 2014