Objective: To determine the minimum volume of infiltrative anesthetic required for pain-free mini-implant placement in the maxillary buccal region by comparing the efficacy of 1.0 mL with 0.5 mL of 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine during mini-implant placement.
Method and materials: This split-mouth study involved 19 healthy patients without systemic disease, recent history of allergy, or medications within the age group of 17 to 28 years belonging to both sexes requiring bilateral buccal mini-implants in the posterior maxilla. Lignocaine 2% with 1:200,000 epinephrine (0.5 mL and 1.0 mL) was randomly injected between the right and left side 30 minutes apart for each consecutive patient. Mini-implants were placed 5 minutes after the administration of the infiltrative anesthetic. The pain response was evaluated during mini-implant placement (T1), and 5 minutes (T2) and 10 minutes (T3) after mini-implant placement on both sides using a pain-rating scale. Descriptive statistics and a factorial repeated-measure analysis of variance were calculated for pain response, sex, and side of the jaw.
Results: At T1, T2, and T3, 1.0 mL of anesthetic had a lesser pain score by 1.00, 1.00, and 0.58, respectively, compared to 0.5 mL, with 95% confidence intervals of 0.43 to 1.57 (P = .001), 0.49 to 1.51 (P = .000), and 0.08 to 1.08 (P = .024), respectively.
Conclusions: 1.0 mL of 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine administered submucosally appears to provide better anesthesia than 0.5 mL during and after insertion of mini-implants. This study will help the operator administer the correct volume of infiltrative anesthetic thereby improving pain response, alleviating patient anxiety, and providing a better patient experience during and immediately after mini-implant placement.
Palabras clave: different time intervals, infiltrative anesthetic, mini-implant, orthodontic anchorage procedure, pain scores
