Palatal needle-free anesthesia for upper molars extraction. A randomized clinical trial

Physiology of pregnancy and oral local anesthesia considerations

Background

Safe and effective local anesthesia is a prerequisite for emergency oral surgeries and most dental treatments. Pregnancy is characterized by complex physiological changes, and increased sensitivity to pain. Pregnant women are particularly vulnerable to oral diseases, such as caries, gingivitis, pyogenic granuloma and third molar pericoronitis. Maternally administered drugs can affect the fetus through the placenta. Therefore, many physicians and patients are reluctant to provide or accept necessary local anesthesia, which leads to delays in the condition and adverse consequences. This review is intended to comprehensively discuss the instructions for local anesthesia in the oral treatment of pregnant patients.

Methodology

An in-depth search on Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed to review articles concerned with maternal and fetal physiology, local anesthetic pharmacology, and their applications for oral treatment.

Results

Standard oral local anesthesia is safe throughout the pregnancy. At present, 2% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine is considered to be the anesthetic agent that best balances safety and efficacy for pregnant women. Maternal and fetal considerations must be taken into account to accommodate the physiological and pharmacological changes in the gestation period. Semi-supine position, blood pressure monitoring, and reassurance are suggested for high-risk mothers to reduce the risk of transient changes in blood pressure, hypoxemia, and hypoglycemia. For patients with underlying diseases, such as eclampsia, hypertension, hypotension, and gestational diabetes, the physicians should use epinephrine cautiously and control the dose of anesthetic. New local anesthesia formulations and equipment, which contribute to minimizing injection pain and relieving the anxiety, have and are being developed but remain understudied.

Conclusions

Understanding the physiological and pharmacological changes during pregnancy is essential to ensure the safety and efficiency of local anesthesia. Optimal outcomes for the mother and fetus hinge on a robust understanding of the physiologic alterations and the appropriate selection of anesthetic drugs and approaches.

The feasibility of needleless jet injection versus conventional needle local anesthesia during dental procedures: a systematic review

This systematic review evaluates current evidence regarding the feasibility of using needleless jet injection instead of a conventional local anesthetic needle. EBSCO, ProQuest, PubMed, and Scopus databases were used to identify relevant literature published in English from 2005 to 2020. Ten studies were selected. Five of them were randomized clinical trials, 3 case-control studies, and 2 equivalence trials. Using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist, 6 studies scored between 67% and 100%, and 4 studies scored between 34% and 66%. According to Jadad's scale, 2 studies were considered strong, and 8 studies were considered moderate in quality. The results of the 10 studies showed differences in patient preference for needleless jet injection. Needleless injection technique has been found to be particularly useful in uncooperative patients with anxiety and needle phobia. Needleless jet injection is not technique sensitive. However, with needleless jet anesthesia, most treatments require additional anesthesia. Conventional needle anesthesia is less costly, has a longer duration of action, and has better pain control during dental extraction. Needleless jet anesthesia has been shown to be moderately accepted by patients with a fear of needles, has a faster onset of action, and is an efficient alternative to conventional infiltration anesthesia technique.

Hydrogels for Treatment of Oral and Maxillofacial Diseases: Current Research, Challenge, and Future Directions

Oral and maxillofacial diseases such as infection and trauma often involve various organs and tissues, resulting in structural defects, dysfunctions and/or adverse effects on facial appearance. Hydrogels have been applied...

Needle-free anesthesia: clinical efficacy of a mucoadhesive patch for atraumatic anesthesia in dental procedures

This study showcases the clinical efficacy of mucoadhesive patches designed for the buccal delivery of lidocaine and prilocaine hydrochlorides (1:1, 30 mg/patch). Such patches were developed for needle-free pre-operative local anesthesia in dentistry, aiming at mitigating the use of infiltrative anesthesia for medium-complexity clinical procedures. The patches were manufactured encompassing drug-release, mucoadhesive and backing layers, all prepared through film casting using biocompatible materials. Fifty-eight (n = 58) adult patients (65% women and 35% men) were randomly selected and included in a one-arm open clinical prospective cohort study. The average age of the subjects was of 50 years. The majority (59%) of the subjects, mostly women (82%), reported needle-phobia or anxiety due to dental procedures, which was assessed through a questionnaire approved by the ethical council for human use in research. The patches were positioned in the gingival region of the teeth involved in the procedure (86% on the maxillary and 14% on the mandibular bone). Two anesthetic patches were applied on each patient: one in the vestibular region and another in the palate/lingual portion, and these patches remained attached to the placement sites throughout the procedures. Concerning the dental procedures performed, 40% were cavity preparations and dental restorations of medium cavities; 29% staple facilities; 10% gingival retractions; 9% subgingival scrapings; 3% gingivalplasties; 3% supragingival preparations; 3% occlusal adjustments; and 2% subgingival preparations. In 90% of the cases, it was not necessary to complement with conventional infiltrative local anesthesia during the procedures. Patients did not report any discomfort or side effect during or after the administration of the patches. Among the cases in which there was the need for complementation, 50% were cavity preparations and dental restorations; 33% supragingival preparations; and 17% gingivoplasties. The complementary anesthesia volume was of 0.63 ± 0.23 mL and women corresponded to 83% of the participants who needed such intervention. Furthermore, in most cases, the patch was capable of initiating the anesthesia within a short time frame (5 minutes) and reaching the maximum anesthetic effect within 15 and 25 min, lasting at least 50 min. Undesirable side effects were not reported either 2 h after the administration or within the 6-month follow-up. Therefore, the anesthetic patches developed provide needle-free, painless, safe, and patient/dentist-friendly advances in performing routine medium-complexity dental procedures.