header
Image from OpenLibrary

Anesthetic efficacy of 2% mepivacaine versus 4% articaine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars : A randomized clinical trial therapeutic study (MANBIP) part 9 / Mohamed Abdel Hafiz Elhousieny ; Supervised Manar Yehia Fouda , Marwa Mahmoud Bedier

By: Contributor(s): Material type: TextTextLanguage: English Publication details: Cairo : Mohamed Abdelhafiz Elhousieny , 2018Description: 109 P. : charts , facsimiles ; 25cmOther title:
  • فاعلية تخدير 2% مبيفاكين مقابل 4% ارتيكين فى احصار العصب السنخى السفلى فى المرضى ذوى التهاب اللب غير الردود فى أضراس الفك السفلى : تجربة اكلينيكية بالأنتقاء الشوائى [Added title page title]
Subject(s): Available additional physical forms:
  • Issued also as CD
Dissertation note: Thesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine - Department of Endodontics Summary: This clinical study was conducted to assess the anesthetic efficacy of 2% Mepivacaine versus 4% Articaine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars during access cavity preparation and instrumentation. The study design was a randomized blinded clinical trial in which the study participants and assessor didn{u2019}t know which intervention has been received. Sixty-six patients with vital lower posterior teeth received single-visit root canal treatment using ProTaper Universal rotary system for canal preparation, they were randomly divided into two groups (n=33) according to the anesthetic solution used either Group M (3.6 ml mepivacaine hydrochloride 2% with 1:100000 epinephrine) or Group A (3.4 ml articaine hydrochloride 4% with 1:100000 epinephrine). The pain was assessed using numerical rating scale (NRS) during access cavity preparation and instrumentation and the need for supplemental anesthesia was also recorded. All demographic data and NRS scores obtained from patients were analyzed and the results showed similarity between both groups regarding age, gender distribution and tooth type. There was no difference in pain level between both groups in the NRS scores at the different observed times (During Access cavity preparation and During Instrumentation)
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Holdings
Item type Current library Home library Call number Copy number Status Date due Barcode
Thesis Thesis قاعة الرسائل الجامعية - الدور الاول المكتبة المركزبة الجديدة - جامعة القاهرة Cai01.09.02.M.Sc.2018.Mo.A (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Not for loan 01010110082898000
CD - Rom CD - Rom مخـــزن الرســائل الجـــامعية - البدروم المكتبة المركزبة الجديدة - جامعة القاهرة Cai01.09.02.M.Sc.2018.Mo.A (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 82898.CD Not for loan 01020110082898000

Thesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine - Department of Endodontics

This clinical study was conducted to assess the anesthetic efficacy of 2% Mepivacaine versus 4% Articaine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars during access cavity preparation and instrumentation. The study design was a randomized blinded clinical trial in which the study participants and assessor didn{u2019}t know which intervention has been received. Sixty-six patients with vital lower posterior teeth received single-visit root canal treatment using ProTaper Universal rotary system for canal preparation, they were randomly divided into two groups (n=33) according to the anesthetic solution used either Group M (3.6 ml mepivacaine hydrochloride 2% with 1:100000 epinephrine) or Group A (3.4 ml articaine hydrochloride 4% with 1:100000 epinephrine). The pain was assessed using numerical rating scale (NRS) during access cavity preparation and instrumentation and the need for supplemental anesthesia was also recorded. All demographic data and NRS scores obtained from patients were analyzed and the results showed similarity between both groups regarding age, gender distribution and tooth type. There was no difference in pain level between both groups in the NRS scores at the different observed times (During Access cavity preparation and During Instrumentation)

Issued also as CD

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.