Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

May 5, 2023; Sydney, Australia
IV International Scientific and Theoretical Conference «Current issues of science, prospects and challenges»

Papers indexed in Google Scholar

SELECTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE BENEFITS OF USING ATRICAINE WITH A VASOCONSTRICTOR 1:200000 DURING DENTAL MANIPULATIONS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE IMPACT ON THE CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM

Published 17.05.2023

  • Serhii Turchenenko
    • ,
  • Yurii Yarov
    • ,
  • Svitlana Yarova
    • ,
  • Maya Yermolaieva
    • ,
  • Yuliia Turchenenko
    •
PDF

Abstract

Fighting pain has always been a dream of mankind. As long as medicine exists, this problem is considered one of the most important and is constantly being developed and improved. Today, modern dentistry uses innovative methods of pain relief, which allow local anesthesia to be performed most effectively and in the most comfortable conditions for both the patient and the doctor [1,8].

References

  1. Lasemi E, Sezavar M, Habibi L, Hemmat S, Sarkarat F, Nematollahi Z. Articaine (4%) with epinephrine (1:100,000 or 1:200,000) in inferior alveolar nerve block: Effects on the vital signs and onset, and duration of anesthesia. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2015 Dec;15(4):201-205. doi: 10.17245/jdapm.2015.15.4.201.
  2. Knoll-Köhler E, Knöller M, Brandt K, Becker J. Cardiohemodynamic and serum catecholamine response to surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars under local anesthesia: a randomized double-blind parallel group and crossover study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991;49(9):957–962.
  3. Tófoli GR, Ramacciato JC, de Oliveira PC, Volpato MC, Groppo FC, Ranali J. Comparison of effectiveness of 4% articaine associated with 1: 100,000 or 1: 200,000 epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve block. Anesth Prog. 2003;50:164–168.
  4. Santos CF, Modena KC, Giglio FP, Sakai VT, Calvo AM, Colombini BL, et al. 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. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65:2445–2452.
  5. Moore PA, Boynes SG, Hersh EV, DeRossi SS, Sollecito TP, Goodson JM, et al. The anesthetic efficacy of 4 percent articaine 1: 200,000 epinephrine: two controlled clinical trials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137:1572–1581.
  6. Пищинский І.А., Захарова І.А. Свойства современных местных анестетиков, применяемых для обезболивания в терапевтической стоматологии. Современная стоматология. 2016; 4:65: 31-34.
  7. Матвеев, А. В., Крашенинников, А. Е., Ягудина, Р. И., Егорова, Е. А., & Коняева, Е. И. Нежелательные реакции на местные анестетики при их применении в стоматологии. Стоматология, 2020, 99.6: 82-88.
  8. Malamed S.F. Handbook of local anesthesia. 6 ed. – St. Louis, 2013. – 996 p.
  9. Клітинська О.В., Шетеля В.В. Аналіз доцільності місцевого знеболення на стоматологічному прийомі дітей. In: The 10 th International scientific and practical conference “Innovations and prospects of world science”(May 25-27, 2022) Perfect Publishing, Vancouver, Canada. 2022. 907 .
  10. Федик, Т. В., Гаджула, Н. Г., Федик, А. В., Мунтян, О. В. Клінічні аспекти вибору місцевого анестетика як профілактика невідкладних станів на амбулаторному стоматологічному прийомі. Редакційна колегія: Ждан В.М., Лисак В.П., Голованова І.А., 2023, 151.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2023 Serhii Turchenenko, Yurii Yarov, Svitlana Yarova , Maya Yermolaieva, Yuliia Turchenenko