ABSTRACT
AIMS: Compare the efficacy of 2% lidocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000) and 4% articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000) in inferior alveolar nerve block prior to extraction of bilateral teeth posterior to canine in interval of one week. METHODS AND MATERIAL: Thirty-five patients were selected for the study. Patients were divided into two different groups: Group 1 - (2% lignocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000)) and Group 2 - (4% articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000)) solution. The study variables for each anaesthetic agent were: onset of action and depth of anaesthesia. A pulp tester was used to demonstrate quantitative values and a visual analogue scale (VAS) was used for qualitative evaluation of the two anaesthetic drugs in 2 min cycle for 10 min with respect to test canine. Anaesthesia was considered successful when pulp tester value 64 was achieved in 10 min for both the anaesthetic agent. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The difference in the efficacy of lignocaine and articaine was analysed using Student's t test. Within group comparison of the response to the pulp vitality test and VAS over various time periods was analysed using repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with post-hoc Bonferroni test. RESULTS: Data analysis showed statistical differences in onset and depth of anaesthesia between the two groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: 4% Articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000) onset of action is faster and depth of anaesthesia is better compared to 2% lignocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000). Many previous studies reported onset of anaesthesia, but this study evaluates onset and depth of both the anaesthetic agent quantitatively and qualitatively.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Dental , Anesthetics, Local , Carticaine , Epinephrine , Lidocaine , Mandibular Nerve , Nerve Block , Humans , Carticaine/administration & dosage , Lidocaine/administration & dosage , Lidocaine/pharmacology , Anesthetics, Local/administration & dosage , Nerve Block/methods , Mandibular Nerve/drug effects , Epinephrine/administration & dosage , Adult , Anesthesia, Dental/methods , Young Adult , Male , Dental Pulp Test , Dental Pulp/drug effects , Pain Measurement , Female , Tooth Extraction , Vasoconstrictor Agents/administration & dosage , Adolescent , Cuspid , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Aim: To present a case of adenomatoid odontogenic tumor (AOT) associated with impacted maxillary lateral incisor in a 12-year-old female that mimicked dentigerous cyst. Background: Adenomatoid odontogenic tumor (AOT) was first mentioned by Steensland in 1905, which is a rare tumor of odontogenic origin. Dreibladt in 1907 coined the term pseudo ameloblastoma. In 1948, Stafne considered it a distinct pathological entity. Case description: A 12-year-old female reported to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery with the chief complaint of progressive swelling on the left maxillary anterior region for 6 months. The clinical and radiographical findings of the case represented a dentigerous cyst or unicystic ameloblastoma, but the histopathological interpretation was interpreted as AOT. Conclusion: The AOT is an unusual entity that is commonly misdiagnosed as a dentigerous or odontogenic cyst. Histopathology plays a vital role in diagnosis and further management. Clinical significance: The interest and relevance of the present case are the difficulties in diagnosing accurately based on the radiograph and histopathology. Both dentigerous cysts and AOT are entirely benign and encapsulated lesions, and enucleation poses no major difficulties. The case report highlights the importance of early diagnosis of neoplasm arising in odontogenic tissues. The fact that in cases of unilocular lesions surrounding the impacted tooth in the anterior maxillary region, AOT should also be considered as a differential diagnosis. How to cite this article: Pawar SR, Kshirsagar RA, Purkayastha RS, et al. Adenomatoid Odontogenic Tumor Mimicking a Dentigerous Cyst in Maxilla. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022;15(6):770-773.
