Editorial Type:
Article Category: Research Article
 | 
Online Publication Date: Jan 01, 2017

Effect of Topical Anesthesia Using an Adhesive Patch and Anesthetic Solution

DDS, PhD,
DDS, PhD,
DDS, PhD, and
DDS, PhD
Page Range: 73 – 79
DOI: 10.2344/anpr-64-02-05
Save
Download PDF

We analyzed trigeminal somatosensory evoked potentials (TSEP) to the alveolar mucosa to investigate the efficacy of an amide local anesthetic, 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 12.5 μg/mL epinephrine (Lido treatment) as a topical anesthetic. Eighteen consenting healthy adult volunteers were enrolled. A volume of 0.06 mL of Lido, 0.06 g of 20% benzocaine, or 0.06 mL of physiological saline (control) was instilled onto a hemostatic adhesive patch, which was then applied to the alveolar mucosa at the maxillary right canine for 5 minutes. An electrical stimulus approximately 5 times that of the sensory threshold was applied using a surface stimulation electrode. The trigeminal somatosensory evoked potential was recorded immediately, 5 minutes, and 10 minutes after removal of the patch. Positive P125 and P310 peaks and negative N100 and N340 peaks were observed as a result of the electrical stimulation. A significant decrease in the percentage change in amplitude of N100-P125 was observed in the Lido treatment immediately, 5 minutes, and 10 minutes after patch removal. In the Lido treatment, trigeminal somatosensory evoked potential amplitude at N100-P125 decreased significantly, suggesting that topical anesthesia produced by an amide local anesthetic may have a topical anesthetic effect as potent as that produced by an ester local anesthetic.

  • Download PDF
Copyright: © 2017 by the American Dental Society of Anesthesiology
<bold>Figure 1. </bold>
Figure 1. 

Surface stimulation electrode (NM-990W, Nihon Kohden Corporation, Tokyo, Japan).


<bold>Figure 2</bold>
Figure 2

An adhesive patch was applied for 5 minutes to the dried gingivobuccal fold of the maxillary right canine.


<bold>Figure 3</bold>
Figure 3

Comparison of trigeminal somatosensory evoked potential percentage change in amplitude N100-P125/P310-N340. (A) Control treatment, (B) Lido treatmen,t and (C) Benzo treatment. Significant differences were observed for N100-P125 between baseline and immediately, 5 minutes, and 10 minutes after patch removal in the Lido treatment. Significant differences were observed for P310-N340 in the Lido and Benzo treatments compared with the Control treatment 5 minutes after patch removal. Lido indicates 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 12.5 μg/mL epinephrine; Benzo, 20% benzocaine.


<bold>Figure 4</bold>
Figure 4

A comparison of visual analogue scale scores. (A) Control treatment, (B) Lido treatment, and (C) Benzo treatment. Box plots show the median, lower and upper quartiles (25–75%), and minimum and maximum values. Lido indicates 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 12.5 μg/mL epinephrine; Benzo, 20% benzocaine.


Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr Toshiyuki Kishimoto, 1-2-2, Masago, Mihama-ku, Chiba-shi, 261-8502 Japan; kishimototoshiyuki@tdc.ac.jp.
Received: Apr 18, 2016
Accepted: Aug 26, 2016