Assessing the Efficacy of Buffered Versus Nonbuffered Lidocaine in Dental Extractions: A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Injections using buffered lidocaine may decrease discomfort, have a quicker onset, and be a more efficacious local anesthetic. Previous studies have been inconclusive in the oral context. PURPOSE: To address if bicarbonate buffered 2% lidocaine can decrease pain from the use of local anesthesia, has a quicker onset time, and is more efficacious. STUDY DESIGN: The design was a single-center double-blinded randomized control trial, set in an outpatient oral and maxillofacial clinic housed in the University of Cincinnati Medical Center. Inclusion criteria for the study were patients requiring a single tooth extraction due either to caries or periodontal disease. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The predictor variable was the local anesthetic used either nonbuffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (control) or bicarbonate buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (study) was randomly assigned. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES: Primary outcome variables were injection pain score, and postoperative pain, time to anesthetic onset, and the number of rounds of injections required to achieve adequate anesthesia. COVARIATES: The covariates were jaw involved, age, sex, and race, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, current tobacco use, history of psychiatric illness, chronic pain, and preoperative pain score. ANALYSES: Test statistics were calculated using Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Spearman rank correlation test, χ2 test for bivariate analyses, and Fisher's exact test. P values ≤ .05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The final sample was 114 subjects. The mean age of the sample was 42.97 years, standard deviation ±13.43 years. The sample was 39.47% male. The racial demographics were Caucasian (62.28%) and African American (33.33%). Buffered lidocaine did not have a statistically significant relationship with any of the outcomes. The jaw involved had a statistically significant association to the injection pain score (P value = .006), and the number of rounds of anesthetic required (P value = .047). Age showed a statistically significant association to injection pain score (P value = .032), and the number of rounds of anesthetic required (P value = .027). Finally, preoperative pain had a statistically significant relationship with injection pain score (P value = < .001). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In this study, bicarbonate buffered lidocaine did not exhibit any discernible advantages over nonbuffered lidocaine for any study outcomes.

What Happens to Full Mouth Extraction Patients? A Retrospective Review of Patient Mortality at an Academic Medical Center.

PURPOSE: When providers are forced to address the growing oral healthcare needs of an aging and sick population, full mouth extractions (FMEs) are often sought as a solution. The purpose of this observational study was to evaluate mortality rates, mortality timeline, and to identify associated risk factors. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center. All patients who underwent FMEs at the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery clinic from July 1, 2012 to December 31, 2019 due to caries or periodontal disease were included. Predictor variables recorded included a medical history, social history, and patient demographics. The main outcome variable was post-FME death, including the elapsed time from procedure to death. Deaths were identified using the National Death Index. Data were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics and Cox proportional hazard models. Deceased FME patients were compared to living FME patients to identify potential risk factors. Mortality risk index was derived from multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: One thousand eight hundred twenty nine patients were included in the study. Nine hundred seventy six were female with a median age of 49 years (interquartile range 38-58). One thousand seven hundred nine were diagnosed with more than 1 comorbidity and 89% were on medicaid or medicare insurance. One hundred seventy patients (9.3%) were identified as deceased as of December 31, 2019. Of those who died, 87 patients were deceased within 2 years of the procedure and 147 within 5 years of the procedure. Statistically significant factors associated with mortality (P value < .01) included age (hazards ratio [HR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.03), ASA score >3 (HR 3.12, 95% CI 2.2-4.42), nursing home residence (HR 2.66, 95% 1.67-4.28), hepatic disease (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.18-2.78), and oncologic disease (HR 1.91, 95% 1.32-2.77). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 in 10 patients died within 5 years of FME at our center. These patients may be medically and socially compromised. More research is needed to develop FME-specific mortality indices, which may serve useful for clinical decision-making and surgical palliative care.