Perioperative Pain Control

The Assessment of Prolonged Inferior Alveolar Nerve Blockade for Postoperative Analgesia in Mandibular Third Molar Surgery by a Perineural Addition of Dexamethasone to 0.5% Ropivacaine: A Randomized Comparison Study

Background: Perineurally adding dexamethasone to local anesthetics could enable postoperative analgesia. Our aim was to investigate the efficacy of 4 mg dexamethasone and 0.5% ropivacaine on the prolonged duration of mandibular anesthesia for postoperative analgesia during third molar surgery. Materials and method: The patients of both sexes, and in the age range of 17 to 50 yrs of age, received the Gow-Gates anesthesia. Group I received 4 mL of plain 0.5% ropivacaine, with perineurally added 1 mL/4 mg of dexamethasone; group II received 4 mL of plain 0.5% ropivacaine with perineurally added 1 mL of 0.9% saline; group III received 4 mL of plain 0.5 bupivacaine with perineurally added 1 mL of 0.9% saline. The prime anesthesia outcome was the duration of conduction anesthesia (DCA); the secondary outcome was the duration of analgesia (DAN) and analgesia before analgesic intake. Results: In 45 randomly selected subjects (mean age 27.06 ± 8.20), DCA was statistically longest in group I (n = 15) (592.50 ± 161.75 min, p = 0.001), collated with groups II (n = 15) and III (n = 15) (307.40 ± 84.71 and 367.07 ± 170.52 min, respectively). DAN was significantly the longest in group I (mean: 654.9 ± 198.4 min, p = 0.001), compared with group II (345.4 ± 88.0 min) and group III (413.7 ± 152.3 min), with insignificant adverse reactions. One-third of the operated patients absented from the use of analgesics. Conclusion: A amount 0.5% ropivacaine with dexamethasone usefully served as an analgesic with a success rate of 93.4% of the given anesthesia.

Efficacy and safety of 1% ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia after lower third molar surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical study

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to investigate postoperative analgesic effect of ropivacaine administered as main or supplemental injection for the inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in patients undergoing lower third molar surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The double-blind randomized study comprised 72 healthy patients. All patients received two blocks, the IANB for surgical procedure + IANB after surgery for postoperative pain control, and were divided into three groups: (1) 2 % lidocaine/epinephrine + 1 % ropivacaine, (2) 2 % lidocaine/epinephrine + saline, and (3) 1 % ropivacaine + saline. The occurrence of postoperative pain, pain intensity and analgesic requirements were recorded. Data were statistically analyzed using chi-square, Fisher, and Kruskal-Wallis tests and analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni and Tukey correction.

RESULTS

Ropivacaine was more successful than lidocaine/epinephrine in obtaining duration of postoperative analgesia, reduction of pain, and analgesic requirements whether ropivacaine was used for surgical block or administered as a supplemental injection after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Ropivacaine (1 %, 2 ml) resulted in effective postoperative analgesia after lower third molar surgery.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Since pain control related to third molar surgery requires the effective surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia, the use of 1 % ropivacaine could be clinically relevant in a selection of appropriate pain control regimen for both surgical procedure and early postsurgical treatment.

Efficacy and safety of bupivacaine versus lidocaine in dental treatments: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of bupivacaine compared with lidocaine in local anaesthesia in dental treatment. Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched electronically. Relevant journals and references of studies included were hand-searched for randomised controlled trials comparing bupivacaine with lidocaine in terms of efficacy and safety. Sixteen studies were included, of which nine had low, six had moderate and one had high risk of bias. In comparison with 2% lidocaine plus 1:100,000 adrenaline, 0.5% bupivacaine plus 1:200,000 adrenaline showed a higher success rate in inflamed pulp (P = 0.03) but a lower success rate in vital pulp (P < 0.00001), a lower percentage of patients using postoperative analgesics (P < 0.00001), a longer onset times of pulpal anaesthesia and a longer duration of pulpal anaesthesia (P < 0.00001). In comparison with 2% lidocaine plus 1:80,000 adrenaline, 0.75% bupivacaine plus 1:200,000 adrenaline had same level of success rate (P = 0.29), and was better in postoperative pain control (P = 0.001) while 0.75% levobupivacaine had same level of postoperative pain control (P = 0.16); 0.5% levobupivacaine had higher success rate (P = 0.04) and was better in postoperative pain control (P = 0.001) than 2% lidocaine. There was no statistically significance in adverse events between two groups. Given the efficacy and safety, the bupivacaine group is better than the lidocaine group in dental operations that take a relatively long time, especially in endodontic treatments or where there is a need for postoperative pain management.

Effect of low-level laser therapy after extraction of impacted lower third molars

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in the control of pain, swelling, and trismus associated with surgical removal of impacted lower third molars. Thirty patients were randomized into two treatment groups, each with 15 patients-group test (LLLT) and a group control (no-LLLT)-and were told to avoid any analgesics 12 h before the procedure. In group test, the 980-nm diode-laser (G-Laser 25 Galbiati, Italy) was applied, using a 600-μm handpiece, intraorally (lingual and vestibular) at 1 cm from the involved area and extraoral at the insertion point of the masseter muscle immediately after surgery and at 24 h. The group control received only routine management. Parameters used for LLLT were: continuous mode, at 300 mW (0.3 W) for a total of 180 s (60 s × 3) (0.3 W × 180 s=54 J). Group test showed improvement in the interincisal opening and remarkable reduction of trismus, swelling and intensity of pain on the first and the seventh postoperative days. Although LLLT has been reported to prevent swelling and trismus following the removal of impacted third molars, some of these studies reported a positive laser effect while others did not. All references to the use of laser therapy in the postoperative management of third molar surgery employ different methodologies and, in some, explanations as to selection of their respective radiation parameters are not given. This study has demonstrated that LLLT, with these parameters, is useful for the reduction of postoperative discomfort after third-molar surgery.

Laser phototherapy in the treatment of periodontal disease. A review

Many studies in the literature address the effect of low-power lasers in the management of pathologies related to periodontal tissues. Due to the lack of standardized information and the absence of a consensus, this review presents the current status of laser phototherapy (LPT) in periodontics and discusses its benefits and limits in the treatment of periodontal disease. The literature was searched for reviews and original research articles relating to LPT and periodontal disease. The articles were selected using either electronic search engines or manual tracing of the references cited in key papers. The literature search retrieved references on wound and bone healing, analgesia, hypersensitivity, inflammatory process and antimicrobial photodynamic therapy. Each topic is individually addressed in this review. The current literature suggests that LPT is effective in modulating different periodontal disease aspects in vitro, in animals, and in simple clinical models. Further development of this therapy is now dependent on new clinical trials with more complex study designs.

Perioperative pain management

Perioperative pain management requires a multifaceted approach. The local inflammatory injury and the local and centrally mediated responses must be understood and evaluated to be treated appropriately. This article reviews the different classes of medication and where each one fits into a pain management plan. The implementation of multimodal therapy, which combines different techniques, routes of administration, and different drugs, must be managed. Our ultimate goals are to provide safe and effective pain management, reduce adverse outcomes, preserve patients' physical and psychological well-being, and improve the quality of life for patients with acute pain during the perioperative period.