Herbal medicines as anxiolytics prior to third molar surgical extraction. A randomized controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the effects of Passiflora incarnata, Erythrina mulungu, and midazolam in controlling anxiety in patients undergoing mandibular third molar extraction. METHODS: The volunteers underwent extraction of their third mandibular molars in a randomized, placebo-controlled, triple-blind, and parallel clinical trial. Passiflora incarnata (500 mg), Erythrina mulungu (500 mg), or midazolam (15 mg) was orally administered 60 min before the surgery. The anxiety level of participants was evaluated using questionnaires and measurements of physical parameters, including heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and oxygen saturation (SpO2). RESULTS: A total of 200 volunteers were included in this clinical trial. Considering each procedure independently, no significant differences (p > 0.05) in BP, HR, and SpO2 were observed among the protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Passiflora incarnata showed a similar effect to midazolam but differed from placebo and mulungu, which were unable to control anxiety in this situation. Therefore, the results suggest that Passiflora configures an herbal medicine with an anxiolytic effect, adequate to use in third molar extractions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of Passiflora incarnata may be an alternative to benzodiazepines for controlling anxiety in patients scheduled for oral surgery under local anesthesia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : ANSI-388.427.

Buffered 2% articaine versus non-buffered 4% articaine in maxillary infiltration: randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: This randomized, triple-blind, crossover clinical trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy, onset, length of pulp and soft tissue anesthesia, and pain during injection of 2% buffered articaine and 4% non-buffered articaine solutions. METHODS: Each volunteer received two maxillary supraperiosteal anesthesia infiltrations in canine area. The infiltrations were performed at two different sessions using a different local anesthetic solution for each session, and the anesthetic injection speed was always 1 mL/min. The assessment of the onset and length of pulpal and soft tissue anesthesia was performed with the pulp electrical test "pulp tester" and the esthesiometer kit, respectively. Volunteers marked pain during injection on a visual analog scale (VAS). The anesthetics solutions pH was evaluated through the pH meter equipment. RESULTS: There was no difference between the two anesthetic solutions (onset of soft tissue anesthesia, p = 0.5386; length of soft tissue anesthesia, p = 0.718; onset of pulpal anesthesia, p = 0.747; length of pulpal anesthesia, p = 0.375), except for pain during the injection which was lower when buffered 2% articaine was used (p = 0.001) and the pH. The pH analysis revealed that the solutions differed from one another (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The 2% buffered articaine solution provided the same anesthetic properties then 4% unbuffered articaine with a great reduction in pain during injection. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The possibility of use 2% buffered articaine solution instead of 4% articaine maintaining the same anesthetic properties with a great reduction in pain during injection and half of the anesthetic salt concentration.

Comparison of two vasoconstrictors on glycemic levels in diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate glycemic levels in diabetic patients before, during, and after extractions using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (Lido/Epi) and 3% prilocaine with 0.03 IU/mL felypressin (Prilo/Fely). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted to evaluate changes in body parameters and glycemic levels in diabetic patients undergoing two anesthetic protocols during dental extractions. During surgery, we evaluated blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), saturation (SpO2), and capillary glycemic levels (Gly). These parameters were measured at the following surgical moments: basal, 30 min after medication, incision, tooth removal, suture, and 30 and 60 min after anesthesia. RESULTS: Data analysis showed no differences between the groups considering age, weight, and time spent in surgery. Increased systolic BP and decreased diastolic BP were observed in the lido/epi group. No difference was observed in the prilo/fely group among the surgical moments or between the groups regarding BP. No difference was observed in HR and SpO2 between the groups at any surgical moment. However, differences were found when compared the differences in glycemic and basal levels in both groups with greater decreases in blood glucose values for the lido/epi group. In anxiety level evaluation, there was no difference between the different surgical moments. CONCLUSION: Thus, both lido/epi and prilo/fely (maximum 3.6 mL) can be safely used in controlled diabetic patients CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of lidocaine associated with epinephrine did not increase glycemic levels but leads to decrease over time when associated with an anxiety reduction protocol, offering some advantage over prilocaine plus felypressin for diabetic patients.