Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2010 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/3808 |
Resumo: | OBJECTIVE: Local anesthetic solutions with vasoconstrictors are not contraindicated in hypertensive patients, but due to their hemodynamic effects, local anesthetics without vasoconstrictors are mainly preferred by the clinicians. The aim of this study was to compare hemodynamic effects of three different local anesthetics without vasoconstrictors during tooth extraction in hypertensive patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-five mandibular molars and premolars were extracted in 60 hypertensive patients (29 females and 31 males; mean age: 66.95 ± 10.87 years; range: 38 to 86 years old). Inferior alveolar and buccal nerve blocks were performed with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride (HCl), 2% prilocaine HCl or 3% mepivacaine HCl without vasoconstrictor. Hemodynamic parameters namely systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), saturation rate (SR), rate pressure product (RPP) and pressure rate quotient (PRQ) were investigated before and at different intervals after anesthetic injection. RESULTS: The hemodynamic effects of the three agents were similar to each other, although some significance was observed for DBP, MAP, RPP and PRQ values in the lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine groups. CONCLUSION: Lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor can be safely used in hypertensive patients. It is advisable that dental practitioners select anesthetic solutions for hypertensive patients considering their cardiovascular effects in order to provide patient comfort and safety. |
id |
USP-17_92d25507e6ddf14f5a342a17db9da868 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revistas.usp.br:article/3808 |
network_acronym_str |
USP-17 |
network_name_str |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients HypertensionVasoconstrictor agentsHemodynamicsAnesthesiaTooth extraction OBJECTIVE: Local anesthetic solutions with vasoconstrictors are not contraindicated in hypertensive patients, but due to their hemodynamic effects, local anesthetics without vasoconstrictors are mainly preferred by the clinicians. The aim of this study was to compare hemodynamic effects of three different local anesthetics without vasoconstrictors during tooth extraction in hypertensive patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-five mandibular molars and premolars were extracted in 60 hypertensive patients (29 females and 31 males; mean age: 66.95 ± 10.87 years; range: 38 to 86 years old). Inferior alveolar and buccal nerve blocks were performed with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride (HCl), 2% prilocaine HCl or 3% mepivacaine HCl without vasoconstrictor. Hemodynamic parameters namely systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), saturation rate (SR), rate pressure product (RPP) and pressure rate quotient (PRQ) were investigated before and at different intervals after anesthetic injection. RESULTS: The hemodynamic effects of the three agents were similar to each other, although some significance was observed for DBP, MAP, RPP and PRQ values in the lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine groups. CONCLUSION: Lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor can be safely used in hypertensive patients. It is advisable that dental practitioners select anesthetic solutions for hypertensive patients considering their cardiovascular effects in order to provide patient comfort and safety. Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru2010-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/380810.1590/S1678-77572010000400006Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 18 No. 4 (2010); 354-359 Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 18 Núm. 4 (2010); 354-359 Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 18 n. 4 (2010); 354-359 1678-77651678-7757reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/3808/4498Copyright (c) 2010 Journal of Applied Oral Scienceinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessEzmek, BahadirArslan, AhmetDelilbasi, CagriSencift, Kemal2012-04-27T12:09:58Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/3808Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/oai||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2012-04-27T12:09:58Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients |
title |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients |
spellingShingle |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients Ezmek, Bahadir Hypertension Vasoconstrictor agents Hemodynamics Anesthesia Tooth extraction |
title_short |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients |
title_full |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients |
title_sort |
Comparison of hemodynamic effects of lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor in hypertensive patients |
author |
Ezmek, Bahadir |
author_facet |
Ezmek, Bahadir Arslan, Ahmet Delilbasi, Cagri Sencift, Kemal |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Arslan, Ahmet Delilbasi, Cagri Sencift, Kemal |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ezmek, Bahadir Arslan, Ahmet Delilbasi, Cagri Sencift, Kemal |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Hypertension Vasoconstrictor agents Hemodynamics Anesthesia Tooth extraction |
topic |
Hypertension Vasoconstrictor agents Hemodynamics Anesthesia Tooth extraction |
description |
OBJECTIVE: Local anesthetic solutions with vasoconstrictors are not contraindicated in hypertensive patients, but due to their hemodynamic effects, local anesthetics without vasoconstrictors are mainly preferred by the clinicians. The aim of this study was to compare hemodynamic effects of three different local anesthetics without vasoconstrictors during tooth extraction in hypertensive patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-five mandibular molars and premolars were extracted in 60 hypertensive patients (29 females and 31 males; mean age: 66.95 ± 10.87 years; range: 38 to 86 years old). Inferior alveolar and buccal nerve blocks were performed with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride (HCl), 2% prilocaine HCl or 3% mepivacaine HCl without vasoconstrictor. Hemodynamic parameters namely systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), saturation rate (SR), rate pressure product (RPP) and pressure rate quotient (PRQ) were investigated before and at different intervals after anesthetic injection. RESULTS: The hemodynamic effects of the three agents were similar to each other, although some significance was observed for DBP, MAP, RPP and PRQ values in the lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine groups. CONCLUSION: Lidocaine, prilocaine and mepivacaine solutions without vasoconstrictor can be safely used in hypertensive patients. It is advisable that dental practitioners select anesthetic solutions for hypertensive patients considering their cardiovascular effects in order to provide patient comfort and safety. |
publishDate |
2010 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2010-08-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/3808 10.1590/S1678-77572010000400006 |
url |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/3808 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.1590/S1678-77572010000400006 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/3808/4498 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2010 Journal of Applied Oral Science info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2010 Journal of Applied Oral Science |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 18 No. 4 (2010); 354-359 Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 18 Núm. 4 (2010); 354-359 Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 18 n. 4 (2010); 354-359 1678-7765 1678-7757 reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online) instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
collection |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||jaos@usp.br |
_version_ |
1800221675505057792 |