阿替卡因与利多卡因在上颌活髓后牙牙体预备中的麻醉效果比较

Comparison of anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine for maxillary buccal infiltration in patients with vital pulp tooth preparation

目的利用随机、双盲的实验方法比较4%阿替卡因与2%利多卡因(均含有1/10万肾上腺素)在上颌活髓后牙牙体预备过程中颊侧局部浸润麻醉的效果。方法选择40例上颌第一磨牙缺失,需行固定桥修复且双端基牙均为活髓牙的患者,采用双盲法分别在上颌第二前磨牙、第二磨牙颊侧局部注射4%阿替卡因或者2%利多卡因。注射后5min开始牙体预备并评价麻醉效果。结果阿替卡因在上颌第二前磨牙、第二磨牙颊侧局部浸润麻醉成功率均为100%,利多卡因第二前磨牙成功率是80%,第二磨牙是30%。阿替卡因与利多卡因麻醉效果差异有统计学意义(P<0.0001)。结论4%阿替卡因在上颌后牙颊侧局部浸润麻醉效果优于2%利多卡因。

Objective The purpose of this randomized, double-blind study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine （both with 1：100,000 epinephrine） for buccal infiltration in patients experiencing vital pulp tooth preparation in maxillary posterior teeth. Methods Forty patients with maxillary begun 5 minutes after solution deposition. Results The success rate for maxillary buccal infiltration to produce pulpal anesthesia using articaine were 100% both in the second premolar and the second molar, whereas for the lidocaine solution, success rate was 80% in the second premolar and 30% in the second molar. There was statistical significant difference between the articaine and hdocaine solution（ P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusion The efficacy of 4% articaine is superior to 2% lidocaine for maxillary buccal infiltration in posterior teeth.