Strategies for managing pain during endodontic treatment

Acupuncture for Management of Endodontic Emergencies: a Review

Root canal treatment (RCT) employed for painful endodontic conditions like apical periodontitis and irreversible pulpitis is associated with a high incidence of postoperative pain. Pharmacological management for this purpose is effective, but not entirely free from side effects and in some cases may fail to provide adequate relief. Furthermore, concerns have been raised regarding the transmission of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) as a result of the aerosols generated and prolonged chair side time required for RCT. Acupuncture is a traditional Chinese therapy commonly employed as an alternative for the treatment of pain. And what's more, the use of acupuncture has been recently reported as treatment for the management of endodontic pain as well as on the anesthetic success in patients with irreversible pulpitis. This review aims to evaluate the current evidence for acupuncture in endodontics and its potential role in emergency pain relief and management for patients. To combat this, a thorough search for literature within the field was performed in five electronic databases. Retrieved studies were screened according to the pre-defined eligibility criteria. After both an electronic and manual search, five studies were selected for review. These studies reported the beneficial effects of acupuncture in reducing the failure of nerve block in patients with irreversible pulpitis and in controlling both intraoperative and postoperative pain following RCT. In addition, it was also reported to reduce anxiety surrounding the dental procedure and minimized the intake of analgesics after the endodontic procedure, which can result in some unwanted side effects. However, more in depth clinical research is required before any recommendation regarding the application of acupuncture in endodontic patients can be made.

Present status and future directions - Mechanisms and management of local anaesthetic failures

Pain control during root canal treatment is of utmost importance for both the patient and the dental practitioner and many studies have investigated ways of overcoming problems with gaining adequate anaesthesia during treatment. The PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched for evidence-based studies regarding local anaesthesia for root canal treatment. Many variables, including premedication, pain during needle insertion, pain on injection, premedication with various types of drugs, volume of anaesthetic solutions, supplemental anaesthetic techniques, and additives to the anaesthetic solutions, may influence pain perception during root canal treatment. Differences between teeth with healthy pulps versus those with irreversible pulpitis should be considered when the effects of variables are interpreted. There are several concerns regarding the methodologies used in studies that have evaluated anaesthesia success rates. There are some conditions that may help to predict a patient's pain during root canal treatment and these conditions could be overcome either by employing methods such as premedication with a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug prior to the treatment visit or by using supplementary anaesthetic techniques before or during the treatment. However, authors need to be more careful when reporting details of their studies to reduce concerns regarding their study bias.

The effect of pre-operative submucosal administration of dexamethasone, tramadol, articaine on the success rate of inferior alveolar nerve block on mandibular molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: A randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial

AIM

To establish the effects of submucosal tramadol, dexamethasone and articaine on the success of inferior alveolar nerve blocks (IANB) during root canal treatment of mandibular molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (SIP).

METHODOLOGY

In this randomized double-blind, controlled clinical trial, 120 patients with the diagnosis of SIP in their mandibular first or second molars were included and randomly divided into four groups (n = 30). The control group received normal saline and three experimental groups received a single dose of dexamethasone (8 mg/2 mL), or tramadol (100 mg/2 mL) or articaine (4% / 2 mL). The pre-operative pain levels of the patients were measured with the Heft-Parker visual analogue scale (HP VAS). All patients received standard IANB of 4% articaine with 1:200000 epinephrine. Following the observation of lip numbness, submucosal injections were administered into the mucobuccal fold adjacent to the mandibular molars. After 15 min, standard root canal treatment was initiated, and the pain intensity levels recorded from the access cavity preparation to pulp extirpation were measured with HP VAS. The duration of the anaesthesia was also evaluated. The experimental groups were compared using one-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis H-test. The groups that were significantly different were compared pairwise using the Tukey Multiple Comparison test. The Chi-square test was used to compare the categorical variables.

RESULTS

The submucosal administration of articaine significantly increased the success rate to 63% in comparison with the control group that received submucosal saline (p < .05). The success rate of pulpal anaesthesia was 37% in the control group, 57% in the tramadol group and 47% in the dexamethasone group, with no significant difference in the success rate among these groups. In the dexamethasone group, the duration of the anaesthetic effect of IANB was significantly longer than those in the other groups (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with SIP, pre-operative submucosal administration of articaine increased the success rate of IANB, while administration of dexamethasone increased the duration of anaesthesia. These agents can be used in cases where effective anaesthesia cannot be obtained during root canal treatments.

Pre-operative ketorolac efficacy with different anesthetics, irrigants during single visit root canal treatment of mandibular molars with acute irreversible pulpitis

Mandibular molar teeth with acute irreversible pulpitis pose challenges in single visit root canal treatment - (i) success of local anaesthesia and (ii) post-operative pain. One hundred and twenty-six patients with pain associated with carious mandibular molar teeth were enrolled. All patients were administered 10 mg of ketorolac tromethamine prior to local anaesthesia. Local anesthetics used were 2% lignocaine with 1:80 000 adrenaline and 4% articaine with 1:100 000 adrenaline. Three irrigation solutions were used - saline, 3% sodium hypochlorite and dexamethasone. Mean intra-operative pain scores for the lignocaine and articaine groups were 4.33 (±2.58) and 4.22 (±2.88), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference (P = 0.000) in post-operative pain incidence between the lignocaine and articaine groups with 16.7% (10 patients) and 49.2% (29 patients), respectively. Pre-operative ketorolac tromethamine was not effective in reducing the intra-operative pain incidence. However, it was effective in controlling post-operative pain with lignocaine anesthetic group.

Anesthetic Efficacy of Gow-Gates, Vazirani-Akinosi, and Mental Incisive Nerve Blocks for Treatment of Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review compared the anesthetic efficacy between Gow-Gates (GG), Vazirani-Akinosi (VA), and mental incisive (MI) nerve blocks (NBs) with inferior alveolar nerve blocks (IANBs) in mandibular teeth with irreversible pulpitis using meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA).

METHODS

Studies were identified from 4 electronic databases up to June 2019. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the anesthetic success rate of GG, VA, and MI NBs with IANBs in mandibular premolars and molars with irreversible pulpitis were included. The quality of selected RCTs was appraised using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool. Random-effects meta-analyses of risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and random errors were evaluated by TSA. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were included; 2 of them were classified as low risk of bias. No significant difference was observed in the anesthesia success rate compared between GG and IA NBs (RR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82-1.48; I² = 0%). Similarly, no difference was evident between MINB and IANB (RR = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.97-1.36; I² = 0%). Overall, the cumulative success rates for the 3 anesthetic techniques were low. TSA showed a lack of firm evidence for the results of the meta-analysis between GG NB and IANB. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach evaluation showed that the evidence was of moderate quality for GG NB and IANB compared with low quality for MI and IA NBs. Because only 1 study was available comparing VA NB and IANB, a meta-analysis was not performed. The adverse effect associated with MI NB was swelling, whereas it was prolonged numbness for IANB.

CONCLUSIONS

GG NB and IANB showed similar anesthetic efficacy compared with IANB in mandibular teeth with irreversible pulpitis. However, the success rates for each technique indicate the need for supplemental anesthesia. Further well-designed RCTs evaluating different anesthetic techniques with and without supplemental injection are required to provide stronger evidence.