Is mepivacaine as effective as lidocaine during inferior alveolar nerve blocks in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

MicroRNA-27a Suppresses the Toxic Action of Mepivacaine on Breast Cancer Cells via Inositol-Requiring Enzyme 1-TNF Receptor-Associated Factor 2

Objective

To investigate the toxic effects of microRNA-27a on breast cancer cells through inositol-acquiring enzyme 1-TNF receptor-associated factor 2 inhibition by mepivacaine.

Methods

The elevation of miR-27a in MCF-7 of BCC lines was measured, and groups were set up as control, mepivacaine, and elevated groups. Cells from each group were examined for inflammatory progression.

Results

Elevated miR-27a in MCF-7 cells was able to distinctly augment the cell advancement (P < 0.01) and decline cell progression (P < 0.01). Meanwhile, miR-27a reduced the content of intracellular inflammatory factors IL-1β (P < 0.01) and IL-6 (P < 0.01), elevated the content of IL-10 (P < 0.01), suppressed levels of cleaved-caspase-3 and p-signal transducer and activator of transcription-3 (STAT3) (P < 0.01), and increased Bcl-2/Bax (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

Elevated miR-27a in MCF-7 of BCC lineage was effective in reducing the toxic effects of mepivacaine on cells and enhancing cell progression. This mechanism is thought to be related to the activation of the IRE1-TRAF2 signaling pathway in BCC. The findings may provide a theoretical basis for targeted treatment of BC in clinical practice.

Effect of preoperative tramadol, ibuprofen, ibuprofen/acetaminophen on the anaesthetic efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis

The purpose of this double-blind clinical trial was to compare the effect of preoperative tramadol 50 mg, tramadol 100 mg, ibuprofen 600 mg, ibuprofen 600 mg/acetaminophen 1000 mg or placebo 60 min before the administration of inferior alveolar nerve blocks (IANB) of mandibular teeth in patients experiencing symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (SIP). Two hundred and fifty emergency patients diagnosed with SIP were randomly divided into five groups and received medications. Endodontic access was begun 15 min after completion of the IANB, and all patients had profound lip numbness. The Heft-Parker visual analogue scale was used to evaluate pain. Premedication with tramadol 100 mg significantly increased the success rate to 62% than the other groups (p < 0.05). The success rates of ibuprofen, ibuprofen/acetaminophen and tramadol 50 mg groups were not significantly different (p > 0.05). Premedication with tramadol 100 mg enhanced the anaesthetic success of IANB in mandibular molars with SIP.

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.

Combined inferior alveolar nerve block anaesthesia and local infiltration anaesthesia in extraction of impacted mandibular third molars: a randomised controlled trial

Aim To compare the anaesthetic effect of combination of inferior alveolar nerve block anaesthesia and local infiltration anaesthesia with nerve block anaesthesia techniques in the extraction of mandibular third molars.Materials and methods One hundred and fifty healthy adult volunteers were divided into three groups and were administered three different local anaesthetic techniques before tooth extractions: group A (inferior alveolar nerve, lingual nerve and buccal nerve block anaesthesia with lidocaine), group B (inferior alveolar nerve, lingual nerve and buccal nerve block anaesthesia with mepivacaine) and group C (inferior alveolar nerve block anaesthesia with lidocaine and infiltration anaesthesia with mepivacaine). The patients' reported pain on anaesthesia injection and tooth extraction, the surgeon's assessment of anaesthetic effect, the severity of intra-operative bleeding and post-operative complications were evaluated.Results There was no significant difference in visual analogue scale (VAS)-pain of anaesthesia among the three groups. Compared with groups A and B, group C had reduced VAS-pain of tooth extraction scores. Additionally, the surgeon's assessment of anaesthetic effect improved and intra-operative bleeding decreased.Conclusions The combination of inferior alveolar nerve block and infiltration anaesthesia provides a stronger anaesthetic effect in the extraction of mandibular third molars.

Different anesthetics on the efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block in patients with irreversible pulpitis: A network systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The authors of this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of different anesthetics on the efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in patients with irreversible pulpitis.

TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED

The authors conducted a search of MEDLINE databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, and Brazilian Library of Dentistry). There was no restriction on publication year or idiom. The gray literature was also explored. The authors included only randomized clinical trials that compared different anesthetics in the efficacy of IANB in patients with irreversible pulpitis. The risk of bias was evaluated by using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. A random-effects Bayesian mixed treatment comparison model was used to compare different anesthetic solutions in randomized clinical trials with low or unclear risk of bias. Heterogeneity was assessed by using Cochran Q test and I² statistics. Quality of evidence was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

A total of 7,981 studies were identified; only 16 met the eligibility criteria, and they were all meta-analyzed. A significant difference was observed in the pair lidocaine versus articaine, with higher success with articaine (risk ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.63 to 0.88) in the mixed treatment comparison analysis, as this comparison was graded as high-quality evidence. The probability of success for each treatment was 73% for articaine, 57% for prilocaine, 55% for mepivacaine, 53% for bupivacaine, and 12% for lidocaine. This ranking was considered high quality of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The use of articaine can increase the IANB success rate in patients with irreversible pulpitis. Among the anesthetic solutions, lidocaine was the least effective.

Resistance to local anesthesia in people with the Ehlers-Danlos Syndromes presenting for dental surgery

Background

People with the Ehlers-Danlos Syndromes (EDS), a group of heritable disorders of connective tissue, often report experiencing dental procedure pain despite local anesthetic (LA) use. Clinicians have been uncertain how to interpret this apparent LA resistance, as comparison of EDS and non-EDS patient experience is limited to anecdotal evidence and small case series. The primary goal of this hypothesis-generating study was to investigate the recalled adequacy of pain prevention with LA administered during dental procedures in a large cohort of people with and without EDS. A secondary exploratory aim asked people with EDS to recall comparative LA experiences.

Methods

We administered an online survey through various social media platforms to people with EDS and their friends without EDS, asking about past dental procedures, LA exposures, and the adequacy of procedure pain prevention. Among EDS respondents who both received LA and recalled the specific LA used, we compared agent-specific pain prevention for lidocaine, procaine, bupivacaine, mepivacaine, and articaine.

Results

Among the 980 EDS respondents who had undergone a dental procedure LA, 88% (n = 860) recalled inadequate pain prevention. Among 249 non EDS respondents only 33% (n = 83) recalled inadequate pain prevention (P < 0.001 compared to EDS respondents). The agent with the highest EDS-respondent reported success rate was articaine (30%), followed by bupivacaine (25%), and mepivacaine (22%).

Conclusions

EDS survey respondents reported nearly three times the rate of LA non-response compared to non-EDS respondents, suggesting that LAs were less effective in preventing their pain associated with routine office dental procedures.