The Journal of the Korean dental association (대한치과의사협회지)

The Korean Dental Association (대한치과의사협회)
권호 표지

Efficacy and safety of 2% lidocaine HCl with 1:200,000 epinephrine

1:200,000 에피네프린 리도카인의 소개

  • Karm, Myong-Hwan (Department of Dental Anesthesiology, Seoul National University Dental Hospital)
  • Published : 2018.01.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

INTRODUCTION The most commonly impacted tooth is the third molar. An impacted third molar can ultimately cause acute pain, infection, tumors, cysts, caries, periodontal disease, and loss of adjacent teeth. Local anesthesia is employed for removing the third molar. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 or 1:200,000 epinephrine for surgical extraction of bilateral impacted mandibular third molars. METHODS Sixty-five healthy participants underwent surgical extraction of bilateral impacted mandibular third molars in two separate visits while under local anesthesia with 2% lidocaine with different epinephrine concentration (1:80,000 or 1:200,000) in a double-blind, randomized, crossover trial. Visual analogue scale pain scores obtained immediately after surgical extraction were primarily evaluated for the two groups receiving different epinephrine concentrations. Visual analogue scale pain scores obtained 2, 4, and 6 h after administering an anesthetic, onset and duration of analgesia, onset of pain, intraoperative bleeding, operator's and participant's overall satisfaction, drug dosage, and hemodynamic parameters were evaluated for the two groups. RESULTS There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in any measurements except hemodynamic factors (P > .05). Changes in systolic blood pressure and heart rate following anesthetic administration were significantly greater in the group receiving 1:80,000 epinephrine than in that receiving 1:200,000 epinephrine ($P{\leq}01$). CONCLUSION The difference in epinephrine concentration between 1:80,000 and 1:200,000 in 2% lidocaine liquid does not affect the medical efficacy of the anesthetic. Furthermore, 2% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine has better safety with regard to hemodynamic parameters than 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine. Therefore, we suggest using 2% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine rather than 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine for surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars in hemodynamically unstable patients.

Keywords

References

  1. Haas DA, Lennon D. Local anesthetic use by dentists in Ontario. Journal (Canadian Dental Association). Apr 1995;61(4):297-304.
  2. Becker DE, Reed KL. Local anesthetics: review of pharmacological considerations. Anesthesia progress. Summer 2012;59(2):90-101; quiz 102-103. https://doi.org/10.2344/0003-3006-59.2.90
  3. Jastak JT, Yagiela JA. Vasoconstrictors and local anesthesia: a review and rationale for use. Journal of the American Dental Association (1939). Oct 1983;107(4):623-630.
  4. Sveen K. Effect of the addition of a vasoconstrictor to local anesthetic solution on operative and postoperative bleeding, analgesia and wound healing. International journal of oral surgery. Aug 1979;8(4):301-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(79)80052-6
  5. Bromage PR, Robson JG. Concentrations of lignocaine in the blood after intravenous, intramuscular epidural and endotracheal administration. Anaesthesia. Oct 1961;16:461-478.
  6. Wilkinson GR, Lund PC. Bupivacaine levels in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid following peridural administration. Anesthesiology. Nov 1970;33(5):482-486. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-197011000-00004
  7. Ping B, Kiattavorncharoen S, Durward C, Im P, Saengsirinavin C, Wongsirichat N. Hemodynamic changes associated with a novel concentration of lidocaine HCl for impacted lower third molar surgery. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 9/2015;15(3):121-128. https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2015.15.3.121
  8. Ping B, Kiattavorncharoen S, Saengsirinavin C, Im P, Durward C, Wongsirichat N. The efficacy of an elevated concentration of lidocaine HCl in impacted lower third molar surgery. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 6/ 2015;15(2):69-76. https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2015.15.2.69
  9. Aggarwal V, Singla M, Miglani S, Kohli S. Comparison of the anaesthetic efficacy of epinephrine concentrations (1 : 80 000 and 1 : 200 000) in 2% lidocaine for inferior alveolar nerve block in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. International endodontic journal. Apr 2014;47(4):373-379. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12157
  10. WHO. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Bull World Health Organ 2001;79(4):373-374.
  11. Moore PA, Hersh EV. Local anesthetics: pharmacology and toxicity. Dental clinics of North America. Oct 2010;54(4):587-599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2010.06.015
  12. Sisk AL. Vasoconstrictors in local anesthesia for dentistry. Anesthesia progress. 1992;39(6):187-193.
  13. Murakawa T, Koh H, Tsubo T, Ishihara H, Matsuki A. [Two cases of circulatory failure after local infiltration of epinephrine during tonsillectomy]. Masui. The Japanese journal of anesthesiology. Aug 1998;47(8):955-962.
  14. Niwa H, Sugimura M, Satoh Y, Tanimoto A. Cardiovascular response to epinephrine-containing local anesthesia in patients with cardiovascular disease. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics. Dec 2001;92(6):610-616. https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2001.118903
  15. Haas DA. An update on local anesthetics in dentistry. Journal (Canadian Dental Association). Oct 2002;68(9):546-551.
  16. Troullos ES, Goldstein DS, Hargreaves KM, Dionne RA. Plasma epinephrine levels and cardiovascular response to high administered doses of epinephrine contained in local anesthesia. Anesthesia progress. Jan-Feb 1987;34(1):10-13.
  17. Hersh EV, Giannakopoulos H, Levin LM, et al. The pharmacokinetics and cardiovascular effects of high-dose articaine with 1:100,000 and 1:200,000 epinephrine. Journal of the American Dental Association (1939). Nov 2006;137(11):1562-1571. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0092