The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3% mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia: A comparative double blind study with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride containing 1:80,000 epinephrine

Masahiko Shimada, Takuya Miyawaki, Koji Takada, Toru Misaki, Shuichiro Oka, Setsu Yoshimura, Takao Ayuse, Kumiko Oi, Kenji Seo, Genji Someya, Tatsuya Ichinohe, Yuzuru Kaneko, Kiyoshi Ichihara, Hiromichi Ito, Masahiro Umino

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3% mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia was examined at 7 institutions (Table 1) in a double blind study of 231 dental patients (Table 2). NSY-101 (3% mepivacaine hydrochloride without any vasoconstrictor as the N group) was evaluated for its clinical availability and compared with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine as the L group. Clinical equivalency in the success rate was compared between the two groups ; 95.7% in the N group and 98.1% in the L group (Table 3). The L group showed a significantly longer duration of soft tissue symptoms (Table 6). Except for a single local adverse reaction consisting of a slight subcutaneous hemorrhage in the L group, there were no notable changes in blood pressure, heart rate, RPP in any of the patients tested (Table 8). "Clinical availability" is defined as a combination of the success rate and the safety rate including the duration of numbness. The 91.4% "clinically available rate" in the N group was proven clinically equivalent to 91.6% in the L group. In addition, the N group was superior to the L group in the "remarkably available rate". The results showed that NSY-101 was as effective as 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine (Table 3, 4). The shorter duration of NSY-101 (Table 6, 7) is an advantage in that prolonged lip numbness is avoided. NSY-101 was, occasionally less effective in cases of mandibular molars affected by acute inflammation as well as in treatments over thirty minutes (Table 5). However, the significant advantage in safety of vasocon. strictor-free NSY-101 makes it preferable for upgraded dental treatment.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)48-61
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology
Volume30
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2002

Fingerprint

Mepivacaine
Hypesthesia
Local Anesthesia
Lidocaine
Double-Blind Method
Epinephrine
Anesthetics
Tooth
Naphazoline
Safety
Therapeutic Equivalency
Vasoconstrictor Agents
Lip
Heart Rate
Hemorrhage
Blood Pressure
Inflammation
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Lidocaine
  • Local anesthetics
  • Mepivacaine
  • Multi center double blind clinical study

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3% mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia : A comparative double blind study with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride containing 1:80,000 epinephrine. / Shimada, Masahiko; Miyawaki, Takuya; Takada, Koji; Misaki, Toru; Oka, Shuichiro; Yoshimura, Setsu; Ayuse, Takao; Oi, Kumiko; Seo, Kenji; Someya, Genji; Ichinohe, Tatsuya; Kaneko, Yuzuru; Ichihara, Kiyoshi; Ito, Hiromichi; Umino, Masahiro.

In: Journal of Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2002, p. 48-61.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Shimada, M, Miyawaki, T, Takada, K, Misaki, T, Oka, S, Yoshimura, S, Ayuse, T, Oi, K, Seo, K, Someya, G, Ichinohe, T, Kaneko, Y, Ichihara, K, Ito, H & Umino, M 2002, 'The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3% mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia: A comparative double blind study with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride containing 1:80,000 epinephrine', Journal of Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 48-61.
Shimada, Masahiko ; Miyawaki, Takuya ; Takada, Koji ; Misaki, Toru ; Oka, Shuichiro ; Yoshimura, Setsu ; Ayuse, Takao ; Oi, Kumiko ; Seo, Kenji ; Someya, Genji ; Ichinohe, Tatsuya ; Kaneko, Yuzuru ; Ichihara, Kiyoshi ; Ito, Hiromichi ; Umino, Masahiro. / The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3% mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia : A comparative double blind study with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride containing 1:80,000 epinephrine. In: Journal of Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology. 2002 ; Vol. 30, No. 1. pp. 48-61.
@article{c2220452ce474400bc43df2ae9772f88,
title = "The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3{\%} mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia: A comparative double blind study with 2{\%} lidocaine hydrochloride containing 1:80,000 epinephrine",
abstract = "The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3{\%} mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia was examined at 7 institutions (Table 1) in a double blind study of 231 dental patients (Table 2). NSY-101 (3{\%} mepivacaine hydrochloride without any vasoconstrictor as the N group) was evaluated for its clinical availability and compared with 2{\%} lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine as the L group. Clinical equivalency in the success rate was compared between the two groups ; 95.7{\%} in the N group and 98.1{\%} in the L group (Table 3). The L group showed a significantly longer duration of soft tissue symptoms (Table 6). Except for a single local adverse reaction consisting of a slight subcutaneous hemorrhage in the L group, there were no notable changes in blood pressure, heart rate, RPP in any of the patients tested (Table 8). {"}Clinical availability{"} is defined as a combination of the success rate and the safety rate including the duration of numbness. The 91.4{\%} {"}clinically available rate{"} in the N group was proven clinically equivalent to 91.6{\%} in the L group. In addition, the N group was superior to the L group in the {"}remarkably available rate{"}. The results showed that NSY-101 was as effective as 2{\%} lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine (Table 3, 4). The shorter duration of NSY-101 (Table 6, 7) is an advantage in that prolonged lip numbness is avoided. NSY-101 was, occasionally less effective in cases of mandibular molars affected by acute inflammation as well as in treatments over thirty minutes (Table 5). However, the significant advantage in safety of vasocon. strictor-free NSY-101 makes it preferable for upgraded dental treatment.",
keywords = "Lidocaine, Local anesthetics, Mepivacaine, Multi center double blind clinical study",
author = "Masahiko Shimada and Takuya Miyawaki and Koji Takada and Toru Misaki and Shuichiro Oka and Setsu Yoshimura and Takao Ayuse and Kumiko Oi and Kenji Seo and Genji Someya and Tatsuya Ichinohe and Yuzuru Kaneko and Kiyoshi Ichihara and Hiromichi Ito and Masahiro Umino",
year = "2002",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "48--61",
journal = "Journal of Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology",
issn = "0386-5835",
publisher = "Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3% mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia

T2 - A comparative double blind study with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride containing 1:80,000 epinephrine

AU - Shimada, Masahiko

AU - Miyawaki, Takuya

AU - Takada, Koji

AU - Misaki, Toru

AU - Oka, Shuichiro

AU - Yoshimura, Setsu

AU - Ayuse, Takao

AU - Oi, Kumiko

AU - Seo, Kenji

AU - Someya, Genji

AU - Ichinohe, Tatsuya

AU - Kaneko, Yuzuru

AU - Ichihara, Kiyoshi

AU - Ito, Hiromichi

AU - Umino, Masahiro

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3% mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia was examined at 7 institutions (Table 1) in a double blind study of 231 dental patients (Table 2). NSY-101 (3% mepivacaine hydrochloride without any vasoconstrictor as the N group) was evaluated for its clinical availability and compared with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine as the L group. Clinical equivalency in the success rate was compared between the two groups ; 95.7% in the N group and 98.1% in the L group (Table 3). The L group showed a significantly longer duration of soft tissue symptoms (Table 6). Except for a single local adverse reaction consisting of a slight subcutaneous hemorrhage in the L group, there were no notable changes in blood pressure, heart rate, RPP in any of the patients tested (Table 8). "Clinical availability" is defined as a combination of the success rate and the safety rate including the duration of numbness. The 91.4% "clinically available rate" in the N group was proven clinically equivalent to 91.6% in the L group. In addition, the N group was superior to the L group in the "remarkably available rate". The results showed that NSY-101 was as effective as 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine (Table 3, 4). The shorter duration of NSY-101 (Table 6, 7) is an advantage in that prolonged lip numbness is avoided. NSY-101 was, occasionally less effective in cases of mandibular molars affected by acute inflammation as well as in treatments over thirty minutes (Table 5). However, the significant advantage in safety of vasocon. strictor-free NSY-101 makes it preferable for upgraded dental treatment.

AB - The clinical anesthetic efficacy of 3% mepivacaine in infiltration and block anesthesia was examined at 7 institutions (Table 1) in a double blind study of 231 dental patients (Table 2). NSY-101 (3% mepivacaine hydrochloride without any vasoconstrictor as the N group) was evaluated for its clinical availability and compared with 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine as the L group. Clinical equivalency in the success rate was compared between the two groups ; 95.7% in the N group and 98.1% in the L group (Table 3). The L group showed a significantly longer duration of soft tissue symptoms (Table 6). Except for a single local adverse reaction consisting of a slight subcutaneous hemorrhage in the L group, there were no notable changes in blood pressure, heart rate, RPP in any of the patients tested (Table 8). "Clinical availability" is defined as a combination of the success rate and the safety rate including the duration of numbness. The 91.4% "clinically available rate" in the N group was proven clinically equivalent to 91.6% in the L group. In addition, the N group was superior to the L group in the "remarkably available rate". The results showed that NSY-101 was as effective as 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine (Table 3, 4). The shorter duration of NSY-101 (Table 6, 7) is an advantage in that prolonged lip numbness is avoided. NSY-101 was, occasionally less effective in cases of mandibular molars affected by acute inflammation as well as in treatments over thirty minutes (Table 5). However, the significant advantage in safety of vasocon. strictor-free NSY-101 makes it preferable for upgraded dental treatment.

KW - Lidocaine

KW - Local anesthetics

KW - Mepivacaine

KW - Multi center double blind clinical study

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036167710&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036167710&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0036167710

VL - 30

SP - 48

EP - 61

JO - Journal of Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology

JF - Journal of Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology

SN - 0386-5835

IS - 1

ER -