Publications (3)3.08 Total impact
-
Article: A comparison of the clinical anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 0.5% bupivacaine (both with 1:200,000 epinephrine) for lower third molar removal.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study compared the clinical efficacy of 4% articaine (A200) and 0.5% bupivacaine (B200), both with 1:200,000 epinephrine, for lower third molar removal. Fifty patients underwent removal of symmetrically positioned lower third molars, in 2 separate appointments, under local anesthesia either with A200 or B200, in a double-blind, randomized, and crossover manner. Time to onset, duration of postoperative analgesia, duration of anesthetic action on soft tissues, intraoperative bleeding, and hemodynamic parameters were evaluated. A statistically significant difference between the time to onset of A200 (1.66 +/- 0.13 minutes) and B200 (2.51 +/- 0.21 minutes) was found (P < .05). There was no statistically significant difference in the duration of analgesia, whether the patient was subjected to osteotomy or not, regardless of the local anesthetic used (3 to 4 hours; P > .05). However, when patients received B200 they experienced a statistically significant longer period of anesthesia on the soft tissues as compared with when they had received A200 (around 5 hours and 4 hours, respectively, P < .05). The surgeon's rating of intraoperative bleeding was considered very close to minimal for both anesthetics. In the surgeries with osteotomy, the comparison between A200 and B200 showed statistically significant differences in the diastolic (64 mm Hg and 68 mm Hg, respectively, P = .001) and mean arterial pressure (86 mm Hg and 89 mm Hg, respectively, P = .031) when data from all the surgical phases were pooled. Additionally, the mouth opening at the suture removal was statistically different for A200 and B200 solutions (91.90% +/- 3.00% and 88.57% +/- 2.38% of the preoperative measure, respectively) when surgeries required bone removal (P < .05). In comparison with 0.5% bupivacaine, 4% articaine (both with 1:200,000 epinephrine) provided a shorter time to onset and comparable hemostasis and postoperative pain control with a shorter duration of soft tissue anesthesia in lower third molar removal.Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics 07/2008; 106(1):19-28. · 1.50 Impact Factor -
Article: Epinephrine concentration (1:100,000 or 1:200,000) does not affect the clinical efficacy of 4% articaine for lower third molar removal: a double-blind, randomized, crossover study.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study compared the use of 4% articaine in association with 1:100,000 (10 mug/mL; A100) or 1:200,000 (5 mug/mL; A200) epinephrine in lower third molar removal. Fifty healthy volunteers underwent removal of symmetrically positioned lower third molars, in 2 separate appointments, under local anesthesia with either A100 or A200, in a double-blind, randomized, and crossed manner. Latency, duration of postoperative analgesia, duration of anesthetic action on soft tissues, intraoperative bleeding, and hemodynamic parameters were evaluated. A100 and A200 presented very similar latency (1.64 +/- 0.08 and 1.58 +/- 0.08 minutes, respectively; P > .05). Identical volumes of both anesthetic solutions were used: 2.7 mL = 108 mg of articaine plus 27 mug (A100) or 13.5 mug (A200) of epinephrine. The 2 solutions provided similar duration of postoperative analgesia regardless of bone removal (around 200 minutes; P > .05). The 2 solutions also had a similar duration of anesthetic action on soft tissues (around 250 minutes; P > .05). The surgeon's rating of intraoperative bleeding was considered very close to minimal. Transient changes in hemodynamic parameters were observed, but these were neither clinically significant nor attributable to the type of anesthetic used (P > .05). An epinephrine concentration of 1:100,000 or 1:200,000 in 4% articaine solution does not affect the clinical efficacy of this local anesthetic. It is possible to successfully use the 4% articaine formulation with a lower concentration of epinephrine (1:200,000 or 5 mug/mL) for lower third molar extraction with or without bone removal.Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 12/2007; 65(12):2445-52. · 1.58 Impact Factor -
Article: Oral side effects of isotretinoin chronic intake.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Isotretinoin (13-cis-retinoic acid) is a retinoid that has been used for the past 20 years to treat a variety of dermatologic conditions. It is beneficial in many skin conditions, although its side effects and toxicity require careful monitoring by physicians and other health professionals, among them, dentists, who should be prepared to manage an adverse occurrence. In this paper, the oral side effects of isotretinoin are described; and some of them are illustrated.The New York state dental journal 74(4):36-9.
