E-PROOF: E-intervention for protein intake and resistance training to optimize function: A study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Accounting for more than 60% of cancer survivors, older (≥65 years) cancer survivors have a 2- to 5-fold risk of physical function impairment, compared to cancer-free peers. One strategy to improve physical function is dietary and resistance training interventions, which improve muscle strength and mass by stimulating muscle protein synthesis. The E-PROOF (E-intervention for Protein Intake and Resistance Training to Optimize Function) study will examine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a 12-week randomized controlled trial of an online, tailored nutritional and resistance training education and counseling intervention to improve physical function and associated health outcomes (muscle strength, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), self-efficacy, and weight management). METHODS: In this study, 70 older cancer survivors will be randomized to one of two groups: experimental (receiving remote behavioral counseling and evidence-based education and resources), and control (general survivorship education). We will examine the intervention effects on physical function, muscle strength, HRQoL, self-efficacy, weight, and waist circumference during a 12-week period between the experimental and control groups. Three months following the end of the intervention, we will conduct a follow-up assessment to measure physical function, muscle strength, and HRQoL. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT: This study is the first synchronous, online protein-focused diet and resistance training intervention among older cancer survivors. This novel study advances science by promoting independent health behaviors among older cancer survivors to improve health outcomes, and provide foundational knowledge to further address this growing problem on a wider scale through online platforms.

Anesthetic Success Using Nitrous Oxide and a Combination of Lidocaine/Clonidine for the Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block and the Effects on Blood Pressure and Pulse in Patients with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Study.

INTRODUCTION: The pulpal anesthetic success rates for an inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) alone in patients presenting with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis are less than adequate. Nitrous oxide and clonidine have shown increases in IANB success when administered individually, but their success has not been evaluated when used together. The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to determine the effect of nitrous oxide/oxygen plus an IANB using lidocaine/clonidine on the success of the IANB in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and to evaluate the effect of clonidine on blood pressure and pulse. METHODS: Sixty-two emergency patients experiencing moderate to severe pain and a diagnosis of symptomatic irreversible pulpitis were enrolled. Subjects were randomly divided into 2 groups and received nitrous oxide/oxygen and an IANB using 2% lidocaine with either 27 µg clonidine or 18 µg epinephrine as vasoconstrictors. Blood pressure and pulse were recorded before and during the emergency endodontic treatment. Anesthetic success was defined as no or mild pain upon access and instrumentation of the canals. RESULTS: The pulpal anesthetic success rate in both treatments was 58%, with no significant difference between the groups. There was no statistically significant difference in pulse or systolic blood pressure with the use of clonidine compared with epinephrine. Diastolic blood pressure was significant. CONCLUSIONS: The use of nitrous/oxide plus the addition of lidocaine/clonidine for the IANB in teeth with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis resulted in no statistically significant difference in anesthetic success of the IANB. There were no statistically significant differences in pulse or systolic blood pressure with the use of clonidine compared with epinephrine; diastolic blood pressure was significant.

Pigment Epithelium-Derived Factor (PEDF) Receptors Are Involved in Survival of Retinal Neurons.

The demise of retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) is characteristic of diseases of the retina such as glaucoma and diabetic or ischemic retinopathies. Pigment epithelium-derived factor (PEDF) is a multifunctional secreted protein that mediates neuroprotection and inhibition of angiogenesis in the retina. We have studied expression and regulation of two of several receptors for PEDF, patatin-like phospholipase 2 gene product/PEDF-R and laminin receptor (LR), in serum-starved RGC under normoxia and hypoxia and investigated their involvement in the survival of retinal neuronal cells. We show that PEDF-R and LR are co-expressed in RGC and R28 retinal precursor cells. Expression of both receptors was enhanced in the presence of complex secretions from retinal glial (Müller) cells and upregulated by VEGF and under hypoxic conditions. PEDF-R- and LR-knocked-down cells demonstrated a markedly attenuated expression of anti-apoptotic Bcl-2 family members (Bcl-2, Bcl-xL) and neuroprotective mediators (PEDF, VEGF, BDNF) suggesting that both PEDF-R and LR mediate pro-survival effects of PEDF on RGC. While this study does not provide evidence for a differential survival-promoting influence of either PEDF-R or LR, it nevertheless highlights the importance of both PEDF receptors for the viability of retinal neurons.

Pulpal Anesthesia of Adjacent Teeth Following Infiltration of 2% Lidocaine With 1:100,000 Epinephrine in the Maxillary Lateral Incisor and First Molar.

The purpose of this study was to determine anesthetic success in adjacent teeth following a primary infiltration of the maxillary lateral incisor and first molar using 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. Three hundred eight asymptomatic subjects received an infiltration of a cartridge of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine over the maxillary lateral incisor (163 subjects) or first molar (145 subjects). Pulpal anesthesia of the injected tooth and adjacent mesial and distal teeth was monitored with the electric pulp tester in 2-minute cycles for a total of 60 minutes. No response from the subject at the maximum output (80 reading) of the pulp tester was used as the criterion for pulpal anesthesia. Comparisons of the odds of pulpal anesthesia (defined as an 80/80 response to electric pulp testing over 60 minutes) between the experimentally injected tooth and adjacent teeth were analyzed using mixed-models, repeated-measures logistic regression. When compared with the lateral incisor infiltration, the adjacent mesial tooth (central incisor) and distal tooth (canine) achieved statistically lower anesthetic success. When compared with the first molar, the mesial tooth (second premolar) did not differ statistically. However, significant differences were shown between the first molar and the second molar, with the distal tooth (second molar) achieving a statistically higher rate of pulpal anesthesia, which was related to a better duration of anesthesia. For asymptomatic patients, local anesthesia of the adjacent mesial (central incisor) and distal (canine) teeth to the infiltrated lateral incisor had lower pulpal anesthetic success. Because standard infiltration anesthesia of the lateral incisor is of short duration, repeating the infiltration at 30 minutes will result in a high incidence of pulpal anesthesia for 60 minutes. Local anesthesia of the adjacent distal tooth to the first molar (second molar) had a statistically higher rate of total pulpal anesthesia than the infiltrated first molar due to the longer duration of pulpal anesthesia. However, if pulpal anesthesia is required for 60 minutes in the first and second molars, the clinician may need to add an additional infiltration to ensure anesthesia.

Anesthetic Efficacy of Intranasal 3% Tetracaine plus 0.05% Oxymetazoline (Kovanaze) in Maxillary Teeth.

INTRODUCTION: Needle-free anesthetic delivery is a promising alternative to traditional anesthetic routes of administration. The purpose of this study was to determine the patient preference for and pulpal anesthetic efficacy of a 3% tetracaine plus 0.05% oxymetazoline (Kovanaze) nasal spray in maxillary lateral incisors and first premolars. METHODS: Fifty adult subjects randomly received a 3% tetracaine plus 0.05% oxymetazoline (Kovanaze) nasal spray and mock infiltration or a mock nasal spray and 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine infiltration at the maxillary lateral incisor or first premolar in 2 appointments spaced at least 1 week apart in a single-blind cross-over design. Pulpal anesthesia was evaluated with an electric pulp tester. Side effects and subject preferences were also recorded. RESULTS: Anesthetic success was significantly lower for the Kovanaze nasal spray and mock infiltration (22%-37%) than for the mock nasal spray and lidocaine infiltration (89%-91%). Subjects reported more unwanted effects (nasal drainage and congestion, burning, pressure, and sinus congestion) after the Kovanaze nasal spray and mock infiltration than the mock spray and maxillary infiltration. Before participating in the study, more subjects (56%) preferred the nasal spray route versus a standard infiltration (44%). After experiencing both routes of administration, 100% of subjects preferred the standard infiltration. CONCLUSIONS: The 3% tetracaine plus 0.05% oxymetazoline (Kovanaze) nasal spray provided significantly less successful pulpal anesthesia than the lidocaine infiltration, was less preferable, and caused more unwanted effects.

Ibuprofen and Acetaminophen Versus Intranasal Ketorolac (Sprix) in an Untreated Endodontic Pain Model: A Randomized, Double-blind Investigation.

INTRODUCTION: Previously, ketorolac was available for primary use only via intravenous and intramuscular routes. Its availability in intranasal form offers an alternative route of administration that patients can self-administer. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of intranasal ketorolac (Sprix; Egalet US Inc, Wayne, PA) with a combination of ibuprofen/acetaminophen in an acute pain model of untreated endodontic patients experiencing moderate to severe pain and symptomatic apical periodontitis. METHODS: Seventy patients experiencing moderate to severe pain, a pulpal diagnosis of symptomatic irreversible pulpitis or necrosis, and a periapical diagnosis of symptomatic apical periodontitis participated. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups and received either 31.5 mg intranasal ketorolac and placebo capsules or 1000 mg acetaminophen/600 mg ibuprofen capsules and a mock nasal spray. Patients recorded perceived pain scores on a visual analog scale every 15 minutes from drug administration up to 240 minutes. The time to 50% pain relief, the first sign of pain relief, and meaningful pain relief were recorded, and the data were analyzed. RESULTS: A decline in reported pain was observed until 120 minutes after dosing, after which reported pain remained relatively constant. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups for the time to 50% pain relief, the first sign of pain relief, or meaningful pain relief. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of intranasal ketorolac was not significantly different from that of a 1000 mg acetaminophen/600 mg ibuprofen combination. Intranasal ketorolac provides a nonnarcotic alternative and an additional route of medication administration to practicing clinicians.

An Evaluation of Ibuprofen Versus Ibuprofen/Acetaminophen for Postoperative Endodontic Pain in Patients With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis and Symptomatic Apical Periodontitis.

The purpose of this investigation was to compare ibuprofen versus an ibuprofen/acetaminophen combination for postoperative pain control in a patient model specific to teeth diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and symptomatic apical periodontitis. One hundred and two patients presenting with moderate to severe pain from a maxillary or mandibular posterior tooth diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and symptomatic apical periodontitis were included. Following local anesthetic administration, complete endodontic cleaning and shaping was performed. Patients were randomly assigned to receive identically appearing tablets of ibuprofen 200 mg or a combination of ibuprofen 200 mg/acetaminophen 216.7 mg with instructions to take 3 tablets every 6 hours as needed for pain. Patients were also given a prescription for an escape medication to take if the study medications did not adequately control their pain. A 4-day diary was used to record pain ratings and medication use. Moderate to severe pain was experienced by 59-61% of the patients on postoperative day 1 and 50-57% of the patients on day 2, with the pain ratings decreasing over the next 2 days. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in postoperative pain, percussion pain, or medication use. There was no difference between ibuprofen and the combination of ibuprofen/acetaminophen in the reduction of postoperative pain following endodontic debridement in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and symptomatic apical periodontitis.

Is Eye Color Related to Dental Injection Pain? A Prospective, Randomized, Single-blind Study.

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies have investigated the relationship between pain perception and specific phenotypes such as red hair color and various eye colors. Further investigations into biomarkers as they relate to pain could be useful in understanding underlying genetic components involved in these pathways. Additionally, it would be clinically useful to determine if a patient would be more likely to experience pain during dental treatment based on eye color. The purpose of this study was to investigate a link between eye color and perceived injection pain in healthy, asymptomatic white women. METHODS: Three hundred healthy, adult, white female patients were included, 133 with dark eyes and 167 with light eyes. Dental anxiety was assessed with the Corah Dental Anxiety Scale. Subjects with their eye color masked by dark glasses received a right maxillary lateral incisor infiltration of 1 cartridge of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. Patients rated their injection pain on a 170-mm Heft-Parker visual analog scale. Photographs of the subjects' eyes were taken after the infiltrations and categorized into dark- and light-eyed groups by 3 independent observers. Comparisons for injection pain were analyzed using analysis of variance and the Tukey-Kramer test. RESULTS: No significant differences were found for pain of injection between dark- or light-eyed subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Eye color was not shown to be a predictor for injection pain in white women. Therefore, eye color would not be clinically useful in determining if a patient would be more likely to experience pain during dental treatment.

Anesthetic Efficacy of Supine and Upright Positions for the Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block: A Prospective, Randomized Study.

INTRODUCTION: It has been recommended to place patients in an upright position after administration of an inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB), theoretically allowing the anesthetic to diffuse in an inferior direction and resulting in better pulpal anesthesia. The purpose of this study was to compare an upright versus a supine position on the success of pulpal anesthesia when an IANB was administered in asymptomatic teeth. METHODS: One hundred ten asymptomatic subjects were randomly given IANBs by using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine while they were in an upright position and supine position at 2 different appointments spaced at least 2 weeks apart. Pulpal anesthesia was measured in the molars, premolars, and incisors with an electric pulp tester in 4-minute cycles for 60 minutes. Anesthetic success was defined as the subject achieving 2 consecutive 80 readings within 15 minutes of the injection and sustaining the 80 reading for 60 minutes. Success was analyzed by using a mixed model logistic regression. RESULTS: Pulpal anesthesia for the supine position was not statistically more successful than the upright position in the second molars (73% vs 65%), first molars (59% vs 54%), lateral incisors (28% vs 23%), and central incisors (11% vs 8%), respectively. The supine position significantly improved success in the second premolars (63% vs 53%) and first premolars (75% vs 64%). CONCLUSIONS: The supine and upright positions were equally successful in the molars and anterior teeth. The supine position was more successful in the premolars. However, clinically, neither position for the IANB administration would provide complete pulpal anesthesia.

What Is the Outcome of an Incision and Drainage Procedure in Endodontic Patients? A Prospective, Randomized, Single-blind Study.

INTRODUCTION: There are no prospective endodontic studies to determine the outcome of an incision and drainage (I&D) procedure for swelling in healthy, endodontic patients. The purpose of this prospective, randomized, single-blind study was to compare the postoperative course of I&D with drain placement versus a mock I&D procedure with mock drain placement after endodontic debridement in swollen emergency patients with symptomatic teeth and a pulpal diagnosis of necrosis. METHODS: Eighty-one adult emergency patients presenting with clinical swelling received either penicillin or, if allergic, clindamycin and complete endodontic debridement, and then were randomly divided into 2 treatment groups: I&D with drain placement or a mock I&D procedure with mock drain placement. At the end of the appointment, all patients received a combination of ibuprofen/acetaminophen and, if needed, an opioid-containing escape medication. Patients recorded their pain and medication use for 4 days postoperatively. Success was defined as no or mild postoperative pain and no use of an opioid-containing escape medication. Success was evaluated using repeated measure mixed model logistic regression. RESULTS: Both groups had a decrease in postoperative pain and medication use over the 4 days. The mock I&D group had significantly higher success than the I&D group (odds ratio = 2.00; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-3.41). The success rate was 45% with the mock I&D and 33% with the I&D. CONCLUSIONS: After endodontic debridement, patients who received a mock I&D procedure with mock drain placement had more success than patients who received I&D with drain placement. Both groups clinically improved over 4 days.

Effect of a Combination of Intranasal Ketorolac and Nitrous Oxide on the Success of the Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in Patients with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Study.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies in patients with irreversible pulpitis have reported increased success of the inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) using premedication with ketorolac. Preemptive nitrous oxide administration has also shown an increase in the success of the IANB. Recently, ketorolac has been made available for intranasal delivery. Perhaps combining ketorolac and nitrous oxide would increase success. Therefore, the purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to determine the effect of a combination of intranasal ketorolac and nitrous oxide/oxygen on the anesthetic success of the IANB in patients presenting with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. METHODS: One hundred two patients experiencing spontaneous moderate to severe pain with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in a mandibular posterior tooth participated. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups and received either 31.5 mg intranasal ketorolac or intranasal saline placebo 20 minutes before the administration of nitrous oxide/oxygen. Ten minutes after the administration of nitrous oxide/oxygen, the IANB was given. After profound lip numbness, endodontic treatment was performed. Success was defined as the ability to perform endodontic access and instrumentation with no pain or mild pain. RESULTS: The odds of success for the IANB was 1.631 in the intranasal saline/nitrous oxide group versus the intranasal ketorolac/nitrous oxide group with no significant difference between the groups (P = .2523). CONCLUSIONS: Premedication with intranasal ketorolac did not significantly increase the odds of success for the IANB over the use of nitrous oxide/oxygen alone. Supplemental anesthesia will still be needed to achieve adequate anesthesia.

Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Injection Pain Using a Computer-Controlled Local Anesthetic Device (CCLAD): A Prospective, Randomized Study.

There is evidence that the Computer-Controlled Local Anesthetic Device (CCLAD) decreases the pain of oral injections. The purpose of this study was to evaluate injection pain of the inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) using the CCLAD in an upright position versus a supine position. Additionally, we evaluated solution deposition pain with the CCLAD when compared to previous studies using a traditional syringe. One hundred ten asymptomatic subjects were randomly given IANBs using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine while in an upright sitting position and supine position, at 2 different appointments, spaced at least 2 weeks apart. Each subject rated the pain for needle insertion, needle placement, and solution deposition on a Heft-Parker visual analogue scale. Pain ratings were compared between the upright and supine positions using a repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc testing using the Tukey-Kramer procedure. Moderate to severe pain was reported by 10% to 13% of the patients for needle insertion, 74% to 75% for full needle placement, and 8% to 10% for solution deposition. There was no significant difference between groups for phases of the injection. When comparing the injection phases within the groups, the needle placement phase of the injection was statistically more painful than both the needle insertion phase and solution deposition phase ( p = .0001). Using the CCLAD, IANB injection pain of the supine and upright positions was not statistically different. Needle placement was the most painful phase of the injection. Solution deposition pain was less with the CCLAD when compared to other studies of the IANB using a traditional syringe.

Anesthetic Efficacy of Articaine and Lidocaine in a Primary Intraseptal Injection: A Prospective, Randomized Double-Blind Study.

Additional studies are needed to evaluate intraseptal anesthesia in the mandibular first molar. The purpose of this study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of a primary intraseptal injection of articaine and lidocaine, administered with a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery (CCLAD) system, in asymptomatic mandibular first molars. Using a crossover design, 100 subjects randomly received intraseptal injections of 1.4 mL of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine, both with 1:100,000 epinephrine, at 2 separate appointments. Injections were given in the interdental papillae, mesial (0.7 mL) and distal (0.7 mL) to the first molar. An electric pulp tester was used to test for pulpal anesthesia. Pain of injection, postoperative pain, and pulse rate were also evaluated. Data were statistically analyzed. Anesthetic success rate for the mandibular first molar was 32% for articaine and 30% for lidocaine, with no statistically significant difference (p = .8689) between the two. No significant differences were found between formulations for pain of injection. The intraseptal injection did not cause a clinically meaningful increase in pulse rate. Postoperative pain decreased each day with no significant differences between formulations. In conclusion, a primary intraseptal injection does not achieve a high success rate of pulpal anesthesia in the mandibular first molar.

Müller Cell-Derived PEDF Mediates Neuroprotection via STAT3 Activation.

Background/ Aims: This study was performed to reveal signaling pathways exploited by pigment epithelium-derived factor (PEDF) derived from retinal (glial) Müller cells to protect retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) from cell death. METHODS: The survival of RGCs was determined in the presence of conditioned culture media (MCM) from or in co-cultures with Müller cells. The significance of PEDF-induced STAT3 activation was evaluated in viability assays and using Western blotting analyses and siRNA-transfected cells. RESULTS: Secreted mediators of Müller cells increased survival of RGCs under normoxia or hypoxia to a similar degree as of PEDF- or IL-6-exposed cells. PEDF and MCM induced an increased STAT3 activation in RGCs and R28 cells, and neutralization of PEDF in MCM attenuated STAT3 activation. Inhibition of STAT3 reduced PEDF-promoted survival of RGCs. Similar to IL-6, PEDF induced STAT3 activation, acting in a dose-dependent manner via the PEDF receptor (PEDF-R) encoded by the PNPLA2 gene. Ablation of PEDF-R attenuated MCM-induced STAT3 activation and compromised the viability of PEDF-exposed R28 cells. CONCLUSIONS: Müller cells are an important source of PEDF, which promotes RGC survival through STAT3 activation and, at least in part, via PEDF-R. Enhancing the secretory function of Müller cells may be useful to promote RGC survival in retinal neurodegenerative diseases.

Pain Reduction in Untreated Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis Using Liposomal Bupivacaine (Exparel): A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In the treatment of patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis, endodontic debridement is a predictable method to relieve pain. However, there are clinical situations in which emergency care cannot be provided immediately. An unexplored treatment option in these cases may be the use of a long-acting anesthetic to reduce pain in untreated irreversible pulpitis. Some medical studies have shown potential for infiltrations of liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel; Pacira Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA) to prolong pain relief and reduce opioid use postoperatively. The Food and Drug Administration has approved Exparel only for infiltrations; therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare an infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine versus bupivacaine for pain control in untreated, symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. METHODS: Ninety-five emergency patients received 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine via infiltration or an inferior alveolar nerve block to relieve their initial presenting pain. Patients then randomly received either 4 mL liposomal bupivacaine (13.3 mg/mL) or 4 mL 0.5% bupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine by infiltration. Patients received a diary for the day of the appointment and 3 days postinjection to record soft tissue numbness, pain levels, and analgesic (non-narcotic and narcotic) use. RESULTS: No significant differences (P < .05) were found between the 2 anesthetic formulations for pain or the use of pain medications. A statistically higher level of soft tissue numbness was found on days 1 to 3 for the liposomal bupivacaine group. CONCLUSIONS: Although liposomal bupivacaine had some effect on soft tissue anesthesia, it did not reduce pain to manageable clinical levels in patients presenting with untreated, symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.

How Effective Is Supplemental Intraseptal Anesthesia in Patients with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis?

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have reported high levels of success with intraseptal injection for various dental procedures but provide limited information on the use of the injection during endodontic treatment. Therefore, the purpose of this prospective study was to determine the anesthetic efficacy of the supplemental intraseptal technique in mandibular posterior teeth diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis when the conventional inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block failed. METHODS: One hundred patients with a diagnosis of symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in a mandibular posterior tooth were recruited. Following profound lip numbness after the administration of the conventional IAN block, endodontic treatment was initiated. Patients still experiencing moderate to severe pain during treatment were administered mesial and distal supplemental intraseptal injections using 0.7 mL 4% articaine with 1:000,000 epinephrine administered with a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery unit. Success was defined as the ability to perform endodontic access and instrumentation with mild to no pain. RESULTS: Success with the IAN block was achieved in 25% of patients. Supplemental intraseptal injections provided success in 29% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Supplemental intraseptal injections achieved profound pulpal anesthesia in 29% of patients when the IAN block failed. This low level of success would not provide predictable levels of anesthesia for patients requiring emergency endodontic treatment for symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular posterior teeth.

Does Liposomal Bupivacaine (Exparel) Significantly Reduce Postoperative Pain/Numbness in Symptomatic Teeth with a Diagnosis of Necrosis? A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Medical studies have shown some potential for infiltrations of liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel; Pacira Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA), a slow-release bupivacaine solution, to extend postoperative benefits of numbness/pain relief for up to several days. Because the Food and Drug Administration has approved Exparel only for infiltrations, we wanted to evaluate if it would be effective as an infiltration to control postoperative pain. The purpose of this study was to compare an infiltration of bupivacaine with liposomal bupivacaine for postoperative numbness and pain in symptomatic patients diagnosed with pulpal necrosis experiencing moderate to severe preoperative pain. METHODS: One hundred patients randomly received a 4.0-mL buccal infiltration of either bupivacaine or liposomal bupivacaine after endodontic debridement. For postoperative pain, patients were given ibuprofen/acetaminophen, and they could receive narcotic pain medication as an escape. Patients recorded their level of numbness, pain, and medication use the night of the appointment and over the next 5 days. Success was defined as no or mild postoperative pain and no narcotic use. RESULTS: The success rate was 29% for the liposomal group and 22% for the bupivacaine group, with no significant difference (P = .4684) between the groups. Liposomal bupivacaine had some effect on soft tissue numbness, pain, and use of non-narcotic medications, but it was not clinically significant. There was no significant difference in the need for escape medication. CONCLUSIONS: For symptomatic patients diagnosed with pulpal necrosis experiencing moderate to severe preoperative pain, a 4.0-mL infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine did not result in a statistically significant increase in postoperative success compared with an infiltration of 4.0 mL bupivacaine.

Anesthetic Success of an Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block and Supplemental Articaine Buccal Infiltration for Molars and Premolars in Patients with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the anesthetic success of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block, and supplemental articaine buccal infiltration after a failed IAN block, in first and second molars and premolars in patients presenting with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. METHODS: As part of 6 studies, 375 emergency patients presenting with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis received 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine via an IAN block. After profound lip numbness, endodontic access and instrumentation were initiated. If the patient felt moderate to severe pain, a supplemental buccal infiltration of a cartridge of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine was administered (204 patients), and endodontic treatment continued. Success was defined as the ability to access and instrument the tooth without pain (visual analogue scale rating of 0) or mild pain (visual analogue scale rating less than or equal to 54 mm). RESULTS: IAN block success was 28% for the first molars, 25% for the second molars, and 39% for the premolars. There were no significant differences when comparing molars with premolars. For the supplemental articaine buccal infiltration, success was 42% for the first molars, 48% for the second molars, and 73% for the premolars. There were no significant differences when comparing the molars, but there was a significant difference when comparing the premolars with the molars. CONCLUSIONS: For patients presenting with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis, the success rates for the IAN block and supplemental buccal infiltration of articaine of the molars and premolars would not be high enough to ensure profound pulpal anesthesia.

What is the Effect of No Endodontic Debridement on Postoperative Pain for Symptomatic Teeth with Pulpal Necrosis?

INTRODUCTION: Patients without a dentist or access to care may present to emergency rooms with pain. They are often prescribed medications until they can be treated. There are no studies to show if emergency endodontic debridement is better than giving medications during this symptomatic period. The purpose of this prospective, randomized study was to compare debridement versus no debridement on postoperative pain in emergency patients with symptomatic teeth, a pulpal diagnosis of necrosis, and a periapical radiolucency. METHODS: Ninety-five patients presenting with moderate to severe pain were analyzed. The patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: group 1 received anesthesia and endodontic debridement, and group 2 received anesthesia but no debridement. At the end of the appointment, all patients were given ibuprofen/acetaminophen. If needed, they could receive an escape medication. Patients received a 5-day diary to record their pain levels and medication taken. Success was defined as no or mild postoperative pain and no use of escape medication. Success data were analyzed using a logistic regression. RESULTS: Both groups had a decrease in postoperative pain and medication use over the 5 days. The debridement group had a significantly higher success rate than the no debridement group. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to escape drug use. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving debridement or no debridement had a decrease in postoperative pain over the 5 days. Debridement resulted in a statistically higher success rate, but there was no significant difference in the need for escape medication.

Efficacy of a Buffered 4% Lidocaine Formulation for Incision and Drainage: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Study.

INTRODUCTION: Incision and drainage of symptomatic emergency patients with facial swelling is painful even after local anesthetics are administered. The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to compare the pain of infiltration and the pain of an incision and drainage procedure of a buffered versus a nonbuffered 4% lidocaine formulation in symptomatic emergency patients presenting with a diagnosis of pulpal necrosis, associated periapical area, and an acute clinical swelling. METHODS: Eighty-eight emergency patients were randomly divided into 2 groups to receive 2 intraoral infiltration injections (mesial and distal to the swelling) of either 4% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine buffered with 0.18 mL 8.4% sodium bicarbonate using the Onpharma (Los Gatos, CA) buffering system or 4% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. Subjects rated the pain of needle insertion, needle placement, and solution deposition for each injection using a 170-mm visual analog scale. An incision and drainage procedure was performed, and subjects rated the pain of incision, drainage, and dissection on a 170-mm visual analog scale. RESULTS: No significant differences between the buffered and nonbuffered 4% lidocaine formulations were found for needle insertion, placement, and solution deposition of the infiltration injections or for the treatment phases of incision, drainage, and dissection. CONCLUSIONS: Buffering a 4% lidocaine formulation did not significantly decrease the pain of infiltrations or significantly decrease the pain of the incision and drainage procedure when compared with a nonbuffered 4% lidocaine formulation in symptomatic patients with a diagnosis of pulpal necrosis and associated acute swelling.