Although several previous studies have compared the efficacy of Gow-Gates mandibular block (GGMB) and inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB), the results remain controversial. This study used an objective, standardized and precise protocol to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and success rate of GGMB and IANB.
The study group consisted of 162 patients (93 males and 69 females) who were randomly allocated to receive GGMB or IANB for extraction of third molars. Both methods used 2.7 mL of 2% xylocaine for each patient. Pulpal and gingival tissue anesthesia of mandibular central incisors, canines, first premolars and first molars were evaluated at 0, 5, 10, 15 and 60 minutes after injection of local anesthetic solution using both an electric pulp tester and a sharp explorer.
The success rates of pulpal anesthesia in the IANB group (central incisor, 6%; canine, 37%; first premolar, 54%; first molar, 88%) were not significantly different from the GGMB group (central incisor, 8.1%; canine, 37.1%; first premolar, 54.8%; first molar, 83.9%). All subjects achieved 100% lip numbness with both methods. At 60 minutes after injection, the success rates of gingival tissue anesthesia in canine buccal and lingual areas were higher in the IANB group (100% and 100%, respectively) than in the GGMB group (91.9% and 93.5%, respectively). In the molar buccal area, the success rates at 5 and 60 minutes after injection were higher in the IANB group (97% and 100%, respectively) than in the GGMB group (88.7% and 91.9%, respectively). Furthermore, the success rates in the molar lingual area at 10, 15 and 60 minutes after injection were higher in the IANB group (100%, 100% and 100%, respectively) than in the GGMB group (91.9%, 93.5% and 91.9%, respectively). Although IANB achieved higher success rates of gingival tissue anesthesia in some gingival areas, no significant difference between the two methods was found in overall efficacy.
This study demonstrated that the efficacy of pulpal and gingival tissue anesthesia are not significantly different between the GGMB and IANB methods.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The aim of this randomized, double-blinded study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (AE) with 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (LE) for Gow-Gates blocks and maxillary infiltrations in patients experiencing irreversible pulpitis in mandibular and maxillary posterior teeth. Forty patients diagnosed with irreversible pulpitis of a posterior tooth randomly received either AE or LE by using a Gow-Gates injection or maxillary infiltration. Endodontic access was initiated after no response to Endo-ice 15 minutes after solution deposition. Success was defined as none to mild pain on a visual analogue scale after access. Chi-square and analysis of variance statistical tests were used to analyze the data. Successful endodontic treatment substantially reduced the assessment of pulpitis pain by patients (analysis of variance, P < .0001). Overall anesthetic success in both dental arches was 87.5%. Anesthetic success was not influenced by tooth arch (chi(2), P > .7515) or gender (chi(2), P > .1115). AE proved to be as effective but not superior to LE (P > .6002). These results demonstrated the similar anesthetic effectiveness of AE and LE when used during the endodontic treatment of teeth diagnosed with irreversible pulpitis.
Journal of endodontics 06/2008; 34(6):656-9. DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2008.02.016 · 3.38 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The purpose of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the degree of pulpal anesthesia obtained with the conventional inferior alveolar, the Gow-Gates, and the Vazirani-Akinosi techniques in vital, asymptomatic teeth. With a crossover design, 40 subjects received all 3 techniques in a random manner by using 3.6 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine at 3 separate appointments. An electric pulp tester was used to test for anesthesia in 3-minute cycles for 60 minutes of the first molars, first premolars, and lateral incisors. Anesthesia was considered successful when 2 consecutive 80 readings were obtained within 15 minutes, and the 80 reading was continuously sustained through the 60th minute. The ranges of successful anesthesia were as follows: inferior alveolar technique, 25%-62%; Gow-Gates technique, 16%-44%; and for the Vazirani-Akinosi technique, 13%-50%. There was no significant difference (P > .05) in success among the 3 techniques. However, the Gow-Gates and Vazirani-Akinosi techniques resulted in a statistically slower onset of pulpal anesthesia than the inferior alveolar nerve block. We concluded that in vital, asymptomatic teeth and for the subjects who achieved lip numbness, the conventional inferior alveolar nerve block is similar to the Gow-Gates and Vazirani-Akinosi techniques regarding anesthetic success but has a faster onset of pulpal anesthesia.
Journal of endodontics 11/2008; 34(11):1306-11. DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2008.07.025 · 3.38 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The Gow-Gates technique is said to have several advantages over traditional techniques to achieve mandibular nerve anesthesia; however, its routine use is quite limited, mainly due to complications during visual alignment of reference landmarks. The purpose of this study was to verify the validity and accuracy of a new method to reach the injection site.
Fifteen magnetic resonance images were captured. Distances from the ideal injection point in the condylar neck (puncture ideal) to the injection points located in the alpha and beta plane intersection (puncture Gow-Gates and puncture modified) were measured and compared.
Positive and significant (P <or= .003) Pearson correlations between landmarks and injection points confirmed the validity of the modified technique. Paired t test showed that the segment line puncture ideal-puncture modified, 5.17 mm, was 3 times shorter (P < .001) than the segment line puncture ideal-puncture Gow-Gates, 17.91 mm. As calculated by linear regression, establishing the injection point of the modified technique depended only on the anteroposterior and lateromedial condyle positions.
The modified technique proved to be valid and precise and has a determined and an effective injection site.
Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 12/2009; 67(12):2609-16. DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2009.07.042 · 1.43 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.