阿替卡因
医学
甲哌卡因
麻醉
随机对照试验
可视模拟标度
下牙槽神经
荟萃分析
置信区间
局部麻醉剂
科克伦图书馆
外科
牙科
内科学
臼齿
作者
Mohammad H. Alkandari,Mohammad Alshammari,Ahmed Ghaleb,Talal Alshammari,Rawabi Alenezi,Shaikha Almutairi
出处
期刊:Cureus
[Cureus, Inc.]
日期:2024-11-09
摘要
Inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) as an anesthetic strategy has shown conflicting results in terms of efficacy in the treatment of patients with irreversible pulpitis. Mepivacaine and articaine are anesthetic agents commonly used in the IANB technique for pulpal anesthesia. This review aimed to compare mepivacaine and articaine regarding pain and success rate. We conducted a search on the databases PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and Cochrane Central for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing mepivacaine versus articaine until September 2024. The primary outcome of interest was success rate, while the secondary outcomes were pain intensity assessed by a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) and incidence of severe pain. Data were pooled as odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effect model using STATA. Five RCTs including 568 patients were included in the final analysis. While there was no significant difference between the two studied groups regarding the success rate (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.21, p=0.54), articaine significantly reduced the pain intensity compared to mepivacaine (MD: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.86], p<0.001). Moreover, no significant difference was observed regarding the incidence of severe pain. Articaine reduced the intensity of pain post-procedure, with comparable results regarding success rate and incidence of severe pain with mepivacaine. Further large-volume RCTs are warranted to study the differences between the two options in the long term.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI