We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
European Journal of Oral Implantology
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Eur J Oral Implantol 9 (2016), No. 1     23. Mar. 2016
Eur J Oral Implantol 9 (2016), No. 1  (23.03.2016)

Page 59-66, PubMed:27022637


A low dose of subperiosteal anaesthesia injection versus a high dose of infiltration anaesthesia to minimise the risk of nerve damage at implant placement: A randomised controlled trial
Sánchez-Siles, Mariano / Camacho-Alonso, Fabio / Salazar-Sánchez, Noemi / Aguinaga-Ontoso, Enrique / Muñoz, Javier Guardia / Calvo-Guirado, Jose Luis
Purpose: To evaluate whether a low-dose subperiosteal anaesthesia is effective in minimising risks of inferior alveolar nerve damage at implant placement when compared to high-dose infiltration anaesthesia.
Material and methods: One hundred and twenty patients requiring the placement of a single implant in order to replace a missing first mandibular were randomly allocated to two groups: group A (awake hemilip) subperiosteal crestal injection equal to 0.9 ml of articaine with 0.5% epinephrine and group B (numb hemilip) infiltration equal to 7.2 ml of articaine with 0.5% epinephrine in the vestibular fundus. Intraoperative sensory control using sensory tests was carried out in all patients. Outcome measures were neurological complications, intraoperative and postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain and swelling, and a questionnaire evaluating patient satisfaction. Patients were followed for 1 week postoperatively.
Results: There were no cases of nerve injury. Seven days after surgery the postoperative VAS score for pain and swelling was lower in group A in a statistically significant manner (difference = -3.41%; 95% CI: -5.57, -1.26; P = 0.002 and difference = -3.33%; 95% CI: -5.41, -1.25; P = 0.002, respectively).
Conclusions: No nerve damage occurred using either anaesthesia types, therefore the choice of type of anaesthesia is a subjective clinical decision, however it may be preferable to use a low dose (0.9 ml) of subperiosteal anaesthesia, since it is unnecessary to deliver 7.2 ml of articaine to anaesthetise a single mandibular molar implant site.

Keywords: dental implants, inferior alveolar nerve, local anaesthesia