The 15th Triennial International Dental Congress on Anesthesia, Sedation and Pain Control by the International Federation of Dental Anesthesia Societies (IFDAS) will take place October 5–7, 2018, in Nara, Japan. If you are interested in seeing the wide range of sedation and anesthesiology societies that make up the IFDAS, you need only look at the bottom of the preceding page to this editorial. As Anesthesia Progress is the official journal of the IFDAS, this up-to-date list highlights the worldwide interest in sedation and anesthesiology in dentistry. Although all the IFDAS meetings are wonderful opportunities to meet with dentists
We retrospectively investigated the efficacy and safety of propofol administration alone and in combination with midazolam for gag reflex suppression during dental treatment under intravenous sedation. We included 56 patients with an overactive gag reflex who were to undergo dental treatment under intravenous sedation. They were divided into propofol (P group, n = 22) and midazolam with propofol (MP group, n = 34) groups. The P group received propofol alone, while the MP group received midazolam (0.04 mg/kg) prior to target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol (titrated for adequate sedation). The patients' anesthetic records were evaluated for vital sign changes, adverse cardiovascular or respiratory event frequency, the number of forced treatment interruptions, and the TCI-predicted cerebral propofol concentration at gag reflex suppression (posterior tongue stimulation with a dental mirror). No significant differences were observed between the 2 groups preoperatively. There were no cases of forced interruptions or significant respiratory compromise in either group. Cardiovascular adverse event frequency was lower in the MP group than in the P group (all p < .05). Our results suggest that propofol, when combined with midazolam, minimized cardiovascular effects compared with propofol alone when used to suppress the gag reflex in patients during dental treatment under intravenous sedation.
The local anesthetics lidocaine and articaine are among the most widely used drugs in the dentist's arsenal, relieving pain by blocking voltage-dependent Na+ channels and thus preventing transmission of the pain signal. Given reports of infrequent but prolonged paresthesias with 4% articaine, we compared its neurotoxicity and functional impairment by screening cultured neural SH-SY5Y cells with formulations used in patients (2% lidocaine + 1:100,000 epinephrine or 4% articaine + 1:100,000 epinephrine) and with pure formulations of the drugs. Voltage-dependent sodium channels Na(v)1.2 and Na(v)1.7 were expressed in SH-SY5Y cells. To test the effects on viability, cells were exposed to drugs for 5 minutes, and after washing, cells were treated with the ratiometric Live/Dead assay. Articaine had no effect on the survival of SH-SY5Y cells, while lidocaine produced a significant reduction only when used as pure powder. To determine reversibility of blockage, wells were exposed to drugs for 5 minutes and returned for medium for 30 minutes, and the calcium elevation induced by depolarizing cells with a high-potassium solution was measured using the calcium indicator Fura-2. High potassium raised calcium in control SH-SY5Y cells and those treated with articaine, but lidocaine treatment significantly reduced the response. In conclusion, articaine does not damage neural cells more than lidocaine in this in vitro model. While this does not question the safety of lidocaine used clinically, it does suggest that articaine is no more neurotoxic, at least in the in vitro setting.
The purpose of this article was to determine if pediatric dental treatment under general anesthesia utilizing orotracheal intubation takes longer than using nasotracheal intubation techniques. Twenty-six American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification I and II pediatric dental patients, ages 2–8 years treated under general anesthesia, were assigned to 1 of 2 groups: (a) nasotracheal intubation (control, n = 13), (b) orotracheal intubation (experimental, n = 13). Times for intubation, radiographic imaging, and dental procedures, as well as total case time were quantified. Data were collected on airway difficulty, numbers of providers needed for intubation, intubation attempts, and intubation trauma. There was a significant difference in mean intubation time (oral = 2.1 minutes versus nasal = 6.3 minutes; p < .01). There was no difference in mean radiograph time (oral = 4.2 minutes versus nasal = 3.4 minutes; p = .144), and overall radiograph image quality was not affected. There was no difference in dental procedure time (p = .603) or total case time (p = .695). Additional providers were needed for intubation and more attempts were required for nasotracheal intubation versus orotracheal intubation (6 additional providers/22 attempts vs 0 additional providers/15 attempts, p < .01 and p < .05, respectively). Nine of 13 nasotracheal intubations were rated as traumatic (69%) versus 0 of 13 for orotracheal intubations (0%) (p < .01). In 7/9 orotracheal intubation cases (78%), the tube was not moved during treatment (p < .01). Orotracheal intubation does not increase case time, does not interfere with radiographic imaging, and is less traumatic for the patient when performed by physician anesthesiologists, emergency and pediatric medicine physician residents, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and student nurse anesthetists, all with variable nasotracheal intubation experience.
In this issue of Anesthesia Progress, Bowman et al discuss nasal versus oral intubation for pediatric dental treatment (Pilot Study Comparing Nasal vs Oral Intubation for Dental Surgery by Physicians, Nurse Anesthetists, and Trainees). Based on the data reported, the authors conclude that oral intubations are performed more quickly and less traumatically than nasal intubations to such a significant degree that dental surgeons should consider no longer requesting nasotracheal intubation unless absolutely necessary. I would like to challenge that notion, and contend that an anesthesia provider with sufficient expertise, combined with an excellent and gentle technique, can routinely perform atraumatic
Intraoral local anesthesia injection is often perceived as a painful and anxiety-causing dental procedure. Vibration stimulus is one of the nonpharmacologic methods used to reduce unwanted sensations of local anesthesia injection. This clinical study evaluated the effectiveness of a recently introduced vibratory stimulation device in intraoral local anesthesia administration. Thirty-two subjects underwent 2 maxillary local anesthesia injections in 2 different sessions: 1 with conventional techniques and 1 with the aid of a vibratory stimulation device (DentalVibe). The pain levels were evaluated with a visual analog scale and the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale. The subjects were asked to choose the preferred method for future injections. The data were evaluated statistically. There were no significant differences between the 2 injection methods with regard to either pain evaluation method. The preference of the subjects regarding future injection technique was evenly distributed between the groups. The vibratory stimulation device used in this study did not provide any reduction in pain level associated with maxillary infiltration local anesthesia administration.
Thermosoftening treatment of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) nasotracheal tubes (NTTs) can reduce the incidence and amount of epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation. The optimal thermal setting for thermosoftening treatment of NTTs without burn injury was investigated. Two composite types of PVC NTTs were used. Following withdrawal of the PVC NTTs from a bottle of water at 45 or 60°C, the changes in the surface temperature of the NTTs were measured by infrared thermography. Hardness of the NTTs at 25, 30, 35, and 40°C was measured. The incidence of epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation using thermosoftened NTTs was evaluated retrospectively. The surface temperature of both PVC NTTs dipped in 45 and 60°C water decreased to below body temperature 30 seconds after withdrawing them from the bottles. Although thermosoftening treatment proportionally decreased the hardness of both types of NTTs, the degrees differed according to their composition. When avoiding impingement of the NTT on the posterior wall of the nasopharynx, the incidence of mild and moderate epistaxis was 2.3%. Flexibility of PVC NTTs could be obtained by thermosoftening treatment at 60°C without burn injury. Thermosoftening treatment of PVC NTTs may be useful to avoid epistaxis during nasotracheal intubation.
Control of early postoperative pain entails the use of various medications including acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, tramadol, and opioids. However, these medications should be carefully administered in patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease because some medications may trigger adverse reactions after maxillofacial surgeries. The goal of postoperative pain control in patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease is to eliminate pain without complications. Local anesthesia is an efficient tool for the control of postoperative pain after maxillofacial surgeries. We utilized a transdermal drug delivery system, iontophoresis by alternating current, in order to develop an alternative technique for administering local anesthetic to control postoperative pain in 2 patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. A visual analogue scale was used to objectively measure the severity of pain. A 55-year-old woman who underwent mandibular wisdom tooth extraction and an 18-year-old woman who underwent sagittal split ramus osteotomy of the mandible both complained of pain multiple times. After application of iontophoresis, the visual analogue scale score was reduced to zero and postoperative pain could be controlled. There were no adverse events such as bronchospasm or skin irritation after the application of iontophoresis by alternating current.
Retained foreign bodies sometimes occur in various surgical procedures and can lead to severe complications. Foreign bodies in the oral and maxillofacial region are not rare because of the use of many small items and the natural communication with the outside environment in some areas. We experienced a case of foreign body in the nasal cavity, which was discovered 1 year later at a second operation for hardware removal after maxillofacial surgery. A small, soft material is usually placed between the nasal endotracheal tube and nostril to avoid nasal pressure ulcer at the ala of nose after prolonged anesthesia after our group's experiencing some cases of this complication. The foreign body was found in the pharynx during induction of a second anesthesia. Attention should be directed to not leaving any materials in the patient after surgery. In addition to the normal counts of sponges, needles, etc, other small nonsurgical materials used should be recorded by medical staff to help ensure nothing is retained in the patient.
Sugammadex is a novel drug capable of reversing paralysis induced by the common steroidal nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking drugs, rocuronium and vecuronium. Reversal is complete at any depth of blockade dependent on the dose of sugammadex administered. This allows rocuronium to be used as a rescue agent in scenarios where succinylcholine is contraindicated. Sugammadex is considered a safe drug with minimal side effects compared with traditional reversal with neostigmine and glycopyrrolate. This article features a case report where succinylcholine was undesirable and rapid reversal of paralysis with sugammadex was used during general anesthesia for dentistry.
Adverse reactions to local anesthetics are usually a reaction to epinephrine, vasovagal syncope, or overdose toxicity. Allergic reactions to local anesthetics are often attributed to additives such as metabisulfite or methylparaben. True allergic reactions to amide local anesthetics are extremely rare but have been documented. Patients with true allergy to amide local anesthetics present a challenge to the dental practitioner in providing adequate care with appropriate intraoperative pain management. Often, these patients may be treated under general anesthesia. We report a case of a 43-year-old female patient that presented to NYU Lutheran Medical Center Dental Clinic with a documented history of allergy to amide local anesthetics. This case report reviews the use of 1% diphenhydramine with 1:100,000 epinephrine as an alternative local anesthetic and reviews the relevant literature.
Intravenous sedation (IVS) is commonly used to complete dental treatment for uncooperative pediatric patients. Propofol (PRO) is widely used for IVS because of its short context sensitive half-time and amnestic effect. However, administering PRO to patients who have a history of egg anaphylaxis is still somewhat controversial. The evidence that supports the potential risks for allergic reactions following PRO use in patients with egg allergies is limited with some anesthesiologists recommending against its use in these patients. Alternative drug regimens for procedural sedation in this population are therefore desirable. Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a selective α-2 agonist, has antianxiety and sedative properties and has been widely used not only for procedural sedation with mild inhibitory effects on respiration but also during minor surgeries for its analgesic effect. In this paper, we describe the successful administration of a combination of DEX and low-dose midazolam (MDZ) for sedation in an uncooperative pediatric patient. Both DEX and MDZ have been reported as safe and useful sedatives for dental treatment, and their combination may provide a helpful option for IVS of pediatric patients for whom PRO is not preferred.
This is a case report of an infant who underwent thyrolingual cystectomy under general anesthesia. Two tracheal tubes were used: 1 for nasopharyngeal airway and the other for fiberoptic intubation. With this method, nasal intubation was successfully performed without hypoxia and hypercapnia even in a 3-month-old infant. We concluded this is a useful intubation method for infants who are predicted to be a difficult intubation.
More than 100,000 general anesthetic procedures are conducted in United Kingdom every year for dental interventions, according to large survey of the National Health Services.1 The risk of mortality has reduced considerably in the past few decades because of the use of safe and effective techniques. However, adverse effects still exist and are dependent on patient, environmental, and operator factors. We present an uncommon complication of intubation that merits due awareness.
Hypertension is an important health challenge that affects millions of people across the world and is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. It is critical that anesthesia providers have a working knowledge of the systemic implications of hypertension. This review article will discuss the medical definitions of hypertension, the physiology of maintaining blood pressure, outpatient treatment of hypertension, anesthetic implications, and the common medications used by anesthesia providers in the treatment of hypertension. Part I will provide an overview of hypertension and blood pressure regulation. In addition, drugs affecting predominantly renal control of hypertension, such as diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and renin-inhibiting agents, will be discussed. In part II, the remaining major antihypertensive medications will be reviewed as well as anesthetic implications of managing patients with hypertension.
Anesthesia Progress seeks an Editor-in-Chief to oversee all aspects of journal publication. Assesses submitted research papers, manages the peer-review process and ensures high-quality and timely handling of submission. Communicates with authors, editors, reviewers, and readers regarding all aspects of the journal. Contributes to defining the journal scope and policy implementation. Assists with development, composition, and editing of content. Stays abreast of the field and develops excellent relationships with the research community. Collaborates with the editorial team to identify and attract exceptional original research, reviews, and special feature content in the broad field of anesthesiology for dentistry. Collaborates withDuties
Cardiac arrest in the operating room and procedural areas has a spectrum of causesMitra VK, Einav S, Thies K-C, Nunnally ME, Gabrielli A, Maccioli GA, Weinberg G, Banerjee A, Ruetzler K, Dobson G, McEvoy M, O'Conner MF. Cardiac arrest in the operating room: resuscitation and management for the anesthesiologist: part 1. Anesth Analg. 2018;126:876–888.
and
McEvoy MD, Thies K-C, Einav S, Ruetler K, Moitra VK, Nunnallly ME, Banerjee A, Weinberg G, Gabrielli A, Maccioli GA, Dobson G, O'Conner MF. Cardiac arrest in the operating room: part 2—special situations in the perioperative period. Anesth Analg. 2018;126:889–903.