Journal of periodontology
-
Journal of periodontology · Feb 2007
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter StudyHemostatic and anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine HCl with 1:200,000 epinephrine and 4% articaine HCl with 1:100,000 epinephrine when administered intraorally for periodontal surgery.
The objective of this double-masked, randomized, multicenter crossover study was to compare the efficacy of 4% articaine HCl with 1:100,000 epinephrine (A100) to 4% articaine HCl with 1:200,000 epinephrine (A200) for providing effective local anesthesia and hemostasis for periodontal surgery. ⋯ For patients undergoing periodontal surgery, 4% articaine anesthetic formulations containing epinephrine (1:100,000 or 1:200,000) provided excellent surgical pain control. For patients who can tolerate higher amounts of epinephrine, the 4% articaine 1:100,000 epinephrine formulation had the additional therapeutic advantage of providing better visualization of the surgical field and less bleeding.
-
Journal of periodontology · Nov 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical TrialPatient evaluation of a novel non-injectable anesthetic gel: a multicenter crossover study comparing the gel to infiltration anesthesia during scaling and root planing.
Periodontal scaling procedures commonly require some kind of anesthesia. From the patient's perspective, the choice of anesthetic method is a trade-off between the degree of anesthesia and accepting the side effects. The present study evaluates the preferences for a novel non-injection anesthetic product (a gel, containing lidocaine 25 mg/g plus prilocaine 25 mg/g and thermosetting agents) versus injection anesthesia (lidocaine 2% adrenaline) in conjunction with scaling and/or root planing (SRP). ⋯ The data suggest that a somewhat less profound anesthesia with gel is clearly preferred by the patients because of the low incidence of post-procedure problems as compared to conventional injection anesthesia. The median WTP is likely in excess of the acquisition cost of the product, which indicates a favorable cost-benefit ratio for the individual patient.
-
Journal of periodontology · May 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical TrialIntrapocket anesthesia for scaling and root planing in pain-sensitive patients.
In 2 previous multicenter studies evaluating the efficacy of a novel anesthetic gel (lidocaine 25 mg/g plus prilocaine 25 mg/g), there was a rather small, although statistically significant, overall difference between the active and placebo gels. There were, however, large center variations. At centers where the placebo-treated patients reported high pain scores, the difference between treatments was large, suggesting that the anesthetic gel is most effective in patients who experience the procedure as painful. The present multicenter, double-blind, randomized study evaluated the anesthetic effect of this gel in pain-sensitive patients by using a visual analog scale (VAS) and a verbal rating scale (VRS). ⋯ This study confirms the favorable anesthetic efficacy of active gel over placebo in selected pain-sensitive patients. It suggests that the gel may be a valuable alternative to conventional injection anesthesia.
-
Journal of periodontology · Jul 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical TrialIntrapocket anesthesia for scaling and root planing: results of a double-blind multicenter trial using lidocaine prilocaine dental gel.
The efficacy of a novel anesthetic gel (lidocaine 25 mg/g plus prilocaine 25 mg/g in thermosetting agents) for non-invasive periodontal pocket anesthesia was evaluated. ⋯ Intrapocket administration of lidocaine 25 mg/g plus prilocaine 25 mg/g and thermosetting agents may be effective for pain control for scaling and root planing and may offer an alternative to infiltration anesthesia.