Most dental practitioners are aware of the increasing controversy in the United States surrounding the prescribing of opioids for postoperative pain. Fortunately, the use of opioids for surgery with general anesthesia and sedation is not a matter of concern in this controversy. It is understandable from a US public health standpoint that opioid prescribing should receive increasing scrutiny. In 2012, there were 259 million US opioid prescriptions, more than enough for 1 bottle for every adult in the United States. Since 1999, there have been more than 140,000 opioid overdose deaths. In 2014 alone, there were more than 28,000 overdose
Although several adjuncts to the general anesthetic propofol have been proposed, there is insufficient research identifying the ideal agent, and in what dosage, to combine with propofol in dental outpatient anesthesia. Here we examined the combination of remifentanil or nitrous oxide and propofol in patients with severe dental avoidance undergoing dental treatment in the outpatient setting. Eighty patients were randomized to 4 groups and administered propofol/saline solution (PS; n = 20), propofol/remifentanil 0.25 μg/kg/min (PRe-0.25; n = 20), propofol/remifentanil 0.125 μg/kg/min (PRe-0.125; n = 20), or propofol/66% nitrous oxide (PN; n = 20). During anesthesia, the bispectral index value was kept between 40 and 60. Body movements and hemodynamic changes during anesthesia, emergence, and recovery as well as anesthetic cost were compared between the combinations. Body movements were observed in all patients administered PS but in no patients administered PRe-0.25, PRe-0.125, or PN. Postoperative nausea was observed in 5 patients (25%) administered PRe-0.25 and in 1 patient (5%) administered PN. Although both PRe-0.125 and PN were useful clinically, PRe-0.125 was the least expensive combination.
The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness and recovery times of 0.3 and 0.5 mg/kg intranasal midazolam (INM) administered with a mucosal atomizer device (MAD) in a pediatric emergency dental hospital clinic. One hundred eighteen children aged from 4 to 6 years were randomly administered either 0.3 or 0.5 mg/kg INM via an MAD in a triple-blinded randomized controlled trial. Sedation was achieved to some degree in 100% of the sample. The pulse rate and oxygen saturation were within the normal range in 99% of the patients. A burning sensation was reported in 9% of children. The recovery time of the 0.5 mg/kg group was statistically longer than that of the 0.3 mg/kg group (16.5 vs 18.8 minutes) but the difference was not clinically significant. The findings of this study show that 0.3 or 0.5 mg/kg doses of INM resulted in safe and effective sedation. The 0.5 mg/kg dose was more effective than the 0.3 mg/kg dose in reducing anxiety.
To obtain effective infiltration anesthesia in the jawbone, high concentrations of local anesthetic are needed. However, to reduce pain experienced by patients during local anesthetic administration, low-pressure injection is recommended for subperiosteal infiltration anesthesia. Currently, there are no studies regarding the effect of injection pressure on infiltration anesthesia, and a standard injection pressure has not been clearly determined. Hence, the effect of injection pressure of subperiosteal infiltration anesthesia on local anesthetic infiltration to the jawbone was considered by directly measuring lidocaine concentration in the jawbone. Japanese white male rabbits were used as test animals. After inducing general anesthesia with oxygen and sevoflurane, cannulation to the femoral artery was performed and arterial pressure was continuously recorded. Subperiosteal infiltration anesthesia was performed by injecting 0.5 mL of 2% lidocaine containing 1/80,000 adrenaline, and injection pressure was monitored by a pressure transducer for 40 seconds. After specified time intervals (10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 minutes), jawbone and blood samples were collected, and the concentration of lidocaine at each time interval was measured. The mean injection pressure was divided into 4 groups (100 ± 50 mm Hg, 200 ± 50 mm Hg, 300 ± 50 mm Hg, and 400 ± 50 mm Hg), and comparison statistical analysis between these 4 groups was performed. No significant change in blood pressure during infiltration anesthesia was observed in any of the 4 groups. Lidocaine concentration in the blood and jawbone were highest 10 minutes after the infiltration anesthesia in all 4 groups and decreased thereafter. Lidocaine concentration in the jawbone increased as injection pressure increased, while serum lidocaine concentration was significantly lower. This suggests that when injection pressure of subperiosteal infiltration anesthesia is low, infiltration of local anesthetic to the jawbone may be reduced, while transfer to oral mucosa and blood may be increased.
Intravenous sedation with propofol is often administered to anxious patients in dental practice. Pain on injection of propofol is a common adverse effect. This study aimed to determine the age-adjusted doses of midazolam required to erase memory of vascular pain of propofol administration and assess whether the Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) after the pretreatment of midazolam was useful to predict amnesia of the vascular pain of propofol administration. A total of 246 patients with dental phobia requiring dental treatment under intravenous sedation were included. Patients were classified according to their age: 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. Three minutes after administration of a predetermined dose of midazolam, propofol was infused continuously. After completion of the dental procedure, patients were interviewed about the memory of any pain or discomfort in the injection site or forearm. The dosage of midazolam was determined using the Dixon up-down method. The first patient was administered 0.03 mg/kg, and if memory of vascular pain remained, the dosage was increased by 0.01 mg/kg for the next patient, and then if the memory was erased, the dosage was decreased by 0.01 mg/kg. The effective dosage of midazolam in 95% of each age group for erasing the memory of propofol vascular pain (ED95) was determined using logistic analysis. The accuracy of RSS to predict the amnesia of injection pain was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The ED95 of midazolam to erase the memory of propofol vascular pain was 0.061 mg/kg in patients in their 30s, 0.049 mg/kg in patients in their 40s, 0.033 mg/kg in patients in their 50s, and 0.033 mg/kg in patients in their 60s. The area under the ROC curve was 0.31. The ED95 of midazolam required to erase the memory of propofol vascular pain demonstrated a downward trend with age. On the other hand, it was impossible to predict the amnesia of propofol vascular pain using the RSS.
Complications associated with various local anesthetic techniques have been recorded in case reports and reviews. This current case reports a transient incident of blurred, double vision (diplopia) following a Gow-Gates mandibular block injection. There is descriptive discussion on possibilities associated with intra-arterial injection, intravenous injection, diffusion through tissue planes, and the autonomic nervous system pathway to lend credence suggesting the etiology of the complication. For practitioners, recognizing when a complication arises from anesthesia delivery and managing the patient in an appropriate manner is essential to an overall agreeable outcome.
Although cardiac arrhythmias are occasionally associated with dental extractions and dental anesthesia, atrioventricular block is rarely seen during dental procedures. We report a rare case of type I second-degree atrioventricular block (Wenckebach phenomenon) occurring after bilateral extraction of impacted mandibular third molars under general anesthesia in a 16-year-old Japanese girl. Under consultation with a cardiovascular physician, we carefully monitored the patient's vital signs postoperatively, including blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and electrocardiogram, using a bedside monitor. Her postoperative course was uneventful. A 12-lead electrocardiogram the following day revealed no abnormality. In this case, we hypothesize that extubation of the nasotracheal tube or oral/pharyngeal suction might have triggered a vagal reflex that caused type I second-degree atrioventricular block. Our experience indicates that standard cardiovascular monitoring should be used for patients undergoing dental treatment under general anesthesia, even for young, healthy patients, to prevent and detect cardiovascular emergencies.
The incidence of anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions has been reported to vary between 1 : 3500 and 1 : 20,000 cases with a mortality rate ranging from 3 to 9%. Clinical signs present as skin rash, urticaria, angioedema, bronchospasm, tachycardia, bradycardia, and hypotension. Rapid identification and treatment are crucial to overall patient prognosis, as delayed intervention is associated with increased mortality. Diagnosis may be confirmed with clinical presentation, serum tryptase levels, and skin test results. While the main causative agents in anesthetic practice are typically neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBs), latex, and antibiotics, this review aims to discuss recognition, management, and preventive measures in perioperative anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions from benzodiazepine administration.