• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.129-142
• /
• 2018

Introduction: This systematic review evaluated the use of buffered versus non-buffered lidocaine to increase the efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB). Materials and Methods: Randomized, double-blinded studies from PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and ProQuest were identified. Two of the authors assessed the studies for risk of bias. Outcomes included onset time, injection pain on a visual analog scale (VAS), percentage of painless injections, and anesthetic success rate of IANB. Results: The search strategy yielded 19 references. Eleven could be included in meta-analyses. Risk of bias was unclear in ten and high in one study. Buffered lidocaine showed 48 seconds faster onset time (95% confidence interval [CI], -42.06 to -54.40; P < 0.001) and 5.0 units lower (on a scale 0-100) VAS injection pain (95% CI, -9.13 to -0.77; P=0.02) than non-buffered. No significant difference was found on percentage of people with painless injection (P = 0.059), nor success rate (P = 0.290). Conclusion: Buffered lidocaine significantly decreased onset time and injection pain (VAS) compared with non-buffered lidocaine in IANB. However due to statistical heterogeneity and low sample size, quality of the evidence was low to moderate, additional studies with larger numbers of participants and low risk of bias are needed to confirm these results.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.47-56
• /
• 2024

Background: Among the various pain-related diseases that can be encountered at the clinic, there is a neuropathic pain that is difficult to treat. Numerous methods have been proposed to treat neuropathic pain, such as taking medication, nerve block with lidocaine, or neurolysis with alcohol or phenol. Recently, a method of perineural injection using dextrose instead of lidocaine was proposed. This study was designed to compare the effects of perineural injection therapy (PIT) with buffered 5% dextrose or 0.5% lidocaine on neuropathic pain. Methods: The data were collected from the database of pain clinic from August 1st, 2019 to December 31st, 2022 without any personal information. The inclusion criteria were patients diagnosed with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), trigeminal neuralgia (TN), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), or peripheral neuropathy (PN), and patients who had undergone PIT with buffered 5% dextrose (Dextrose group) or 0.5% lidocaine (Lidocaine group) for pain control. The data of patients, namely sex, age, and pain score (numerical rating scale, NRS) were collected before PIT. The data of NRS, side effects, and satisfaction grade (excellent, good, fair, or poor) were collected one week after each of the four PIT, and two weeks after the last PIT. Results: Overall, 112 subjects were enrolled. The Dextrose group included 89 and Lidocaine group included 23 patients. Because the number of patients in the Lidocaine group was too small to allow statistical analysis, the trend in Lidocaine group was just observed in each disease. There were no significant side effects except for a few bruise cases on the site of injection in all groups. The NRS in most Dextrose groups except CRPS were reduced significantly; however, the Lidocaine group showed a trend of pain reduction only in PHN. The Dextrose group except CRPS showed increased satisfaction two weeks after the final PIT. Conclusion: From the results, it is suggested that PIT with buffered 5% dextrose may have a good effect for neuropathic pain without any side effect except for patients with CRPS. This may offer a window into a new tool that practitioners can employ in their quest to help patients with neuropathic pain.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.27 no.5
• /
• pp.463-471
• /
• 2005

Recently, the number of diabetic patients have been increased with westernized living way and meal habitation. The regulation of blood sugar concentration is very important for diabetic patients to keep homeostasis and, to prevent acute or chronic complications. Epinephrine combined with lidocaine is used in dental clinic extensively. And epinephrine combined with lidocaine also effects on decreasing the blood leakage volume by constricting micro vessle and arteriole. But, So far there are few researches about the effect of epinephrine contained in dental local anesthetic agent on the blood sugar of diabetes during minor oral surgery. The purpose of this study was intended to investigate whether epinephrine which combined with dental local anesthetics influence body glucose level in diabetes patients by glucose monitoring. The subject of this study were 38 diabetic patients and 38 normal adults, each patient was checked body glucose after a meal 2 hours later with resting state, and injection 1:100000 epinephrine with dental lidocaine 54 ml or lidocaine 54 ml only. And then the body glucose level was checked 5 minutes and 30 minutes after injection. The results were analyzed by two way ANOVA test (p<0.05). The results were as follows: In the experimental group 1, the mean of the blood sugar level was 180.3 mg/dl before an anesthetic injection, 182.8 mg/dl after 5minutes of the anesthetic injection and 182.2 mg/dl after 30minutes of the anesthetic injection. The change of the blood sugar level was not statistically by two-way ANOVA tests (p<0.05). In the experimental group 2, the mean of the blood sugar level was 237 mg/dl before an anesthetic injection, 234.5 mg/dl after 5minutes of the anesthetic injection and 231.8 mg/dl after 30minutes of the anesthetic injection. The change of the blood sugar level was not statistically by two-way ANOVA tests (p<0.05). In the controlled group 1, the mean of the blood sugar level was 117.6 mg/dl before an anesthetic injection, 119.1 mg/dl after 5minutes of the anesthetic injection and 129.3 mg/dl after 30minutes of the anesthetic injection. The change of the blood sugar level was not statistically by two-way ANOVA tests (p<0.05). In the controlled group 2, the mean of the blood sugar level was 104.2 mg/dl before an anesthetic injection, 102 mg/dl after 5minutes of the anesthetic injection and 105.3 mg/dl after 30minutes of the anesthetic injection. The change of the blood sugar level was not statistically by two-way ANOVA tests (p<0.05).

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.220-224
• /
• 1997

Background: The incidence of pain on injection of propofol varies between 30 and 100%. A variety of pretreatments have been tried to alleviate this problem such as a local anesthetics, cooling and opioids. However, none of these pharmacological maneuvers were satisfactory yet. In a recent study, subhypnotic doses of both thiopental sodium and propofol decrease the acute pain. We report a comparison of thiopental sodium, lidocaine and placebo on the incidence and severity of pain on injection of propofol. Method: A controlled, double-blind study was performed to compare the prior administration of intravenous saline 2 ml(n=30, group S), lidocaine 20 mg(n=30, group L) and thiopental sodium 50 mg(n=30, group T) in alleviating the pain by propofol. Injection pain was assessed with the four-point verbal categorical scoring system. Result: The incidence of injection pain during induction was lower in group L(30%) and T(17%) than group S(77%). The incidence of injection pain was lower in group T(17%) than group L(30%), but not significant statistically. The pain scores for recall of pain in the recovery room was simlar to those pain during propofol induction. Conclusion: The pretreatment of thiopental sodium can be effective in reducing both incidence and severity of propofol injection pain and has similar effect to lidocaine to prevent propofol injection pain.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Laryngology, Phoniatrics and Logopedics
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.56-60
• /
• 2020

Vocal fold injections are usually performed with a patient wake in an office under local anesthesia. For comfortable and safe office-based procedures, thorough anesthesia and premedication should be provided to the following three regions; nasal cavity, oropharynx, and larynx. Topical lidocaine is most widely used anesthetics on office based procedure. Lidocaine has a low to intermediate potency, 45 minutes to 60 minutes' duration of action, and onset of sufficient anesthesia within 90 seconds of topical administration. Tetracaine, prilocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine also have been used in the office-based procedures. Nasal decongestant, oxymetazoline, is also used for widening nasal cavity by constriction of nasal mucosa. The amount of topical and local anesthetics used in vocal fold injection rarely exceeds toxic doses. The physician should know proper anesthesia techniques and must be familiar with the safe dose and complication of all anesthetics used.

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2006.03a
• /
• pp.14-14
• /
• 2006

• Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing
• /
• v.39 no.2
• /
• pp.270-278
• /
• 2009

Purpose: This study was performed to find out the effects of lidocaine or 8.4% sodium bicarbonate mixed with rocuronium on mean arterial pressure, heart rate and withdrawal movement. Methods: Data collection was performed from December 15, 2006 through May 31, 2007. Seventy-five patients with American Society Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical status I & II, under general anesthesia, were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: R group (RG) received rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg; RL group (RLG), rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg mixed with 2 mL of 2% lidocaine; RS group (RSG), rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg with the same volume of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate and withdrawal movement were observed from its injection until 5 min after endotracheal intubation. Results: The incidence of withdrawal movement with its corresponding injections was 72%, 40% and 4% in RG, RLG and RSG, respectively (p<.001). Score of withdrawal movement was the lowest in RSG of all groups (p<.001). While mean arterial pressure (p=.011) in RSG decreased significantly, and heart rate (p=.003) in RG increased more with its injection than before induction of anesthesia. Conclusion: Administration of the equivalent volume of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate with rocuronium is more effective than that of lidocaine with rocuronium compared with rocuronium only, in preventing withdrawal movement and in stabilizing mean arterial pressure and heart rate.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.233-240
• /
• 2020

Background: Palatal injection of local anesthetics is the most painful injection. To obviate the need for palatal injections, local anesthetic agents with diffusibility are being investigated. Hence the present study was designed to analyze the anesthetic efficacy of 2% lidocaine hydrochloride (HCl) with 1:100,000 adrenaline and 4% articaine hydrochloride (HCl) with 1:100,000 adrenaline using single buccal infiltration for the extraction of maxillary premolars. Methods: A prospective, double-blind, crossover, randomized clinical study was performed on 60 consecutive systemically healthy patients with an age range of 15-30 years, requiring extraction of asymptomatic bilateral maxillary premolars for orthodontic purposes. They received 1ml buccal infiltration of 4% articaine HCl with 1:100,000 adrenaline on one side and 2% lidocaine HCl with 1:100,000 adrenaline on the other side. The extraction procedure on either side was scheduled 14 days apart. Parameters assessed were the time of onset of anesthesia, intraoperative discomfort, hemodynamic parameters, and the duration of analgesia. Analysis of the data was done using the Mann-Whitney test, the Wilcoxon test, the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA test, and the chi-square test. Statistical significance was established at P < 0.05. Results: Articaine showed a faster time of onset and longer duration of analgesia than lidocaine. However, the difference in the intraoperative discomfort and hemodynamic parameters was statistically insignificant. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, it can be concluded that the extraction of maxillary premolars can be performed with a single buccal infiltration of 2% lidocaine HCl with 1:100,000 adrenaline, which is one of the most commonly used local anesthetic agent.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.158-163
• /
• 2016

Background: Phenol and alcohol have been used to ablate nerves to treat pain but are not specific for nerves and can damage surrounding soft tissue. Lidocaine at concentrations > 8% injected intrathecal in the animal model has been shown to be neurotoxic. Tests the hypothesis that 10% lidocaine is neurolytic after a peri-neural blockade in an ex vivo experiment on the canine sciatic nerve. Methods: Under ultrasound, one canine sciatic nerve was injected peri-neurally with 10 cc saline and another with 10 cc of 10% lidocaine. After 20 minutes, the sciatic nerve was dissected with gross inspection. A 3 cm segment was excised and preserved in 10% buffered formalin fixative solution. Both samples underwent progressive dehydration and infusion of paraffin after which they were placed on paraffin blocks. The sections were cut at $4{\mu}m$ and stained with hemoxylin and eosin. Microscopic review was performed by a pathologist from Henry Ford Hospital who was blinded to which experimental group each sample was in. Results: The lidocaine injected nerve demonstrated loss of gross architecture on visual inspection while the saline injected nerve did not. No gross changes were seen in the surrounding soft tissue seen in either group. The lidocaine injected sample showed basophilic degeneration with marked cytoplasmic vacuolation in the nerve fibers with separation of individual fibers and endoneurial edema. The saline injected sample showed normal neural tissue. Conclusions: Ten percent lidocaine causes rapid neurolytic changes with ultrasound guided peri-neural injection. The study was limited by only a single nerve being tested with acute exposure.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.35-39
• /
• 1998

From May 1994 to May 1995, we performed a prospective controlled double-blind clinical study of 85 patients(85 shoulders). For inclusion in the study all patients met the following criteria: 1) a diagnosis of impingement syndrome by lidocaine injection test; 2) symptoms for at least three months; 3) no previous subacromial injection; 4) no evidence of rotator cuff tear. We excluded the patients from the study who showed a instability or other clear primary cause. The patients were randomized to receive either 5/subcc/ 2% lidocaine with 4ee of 20mg/cc Depomedrol(Group 1) in 45 cases or 5/subcc/ 2% lidocaine solely(Group 2) in 40 cases. At three month follow-up, all results were better in steroid group than control group. But at one year, improvement of pain and daily activity showed no difference between two groups. So we conclude that the use of subacromial steroid injection is effective for short-term therapy in the treatment of subacromial impingement syndrome, but the long-term effectiveness is doubtful.