Home Subscription Services

Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache
OFPH Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Accepted Manuscripts
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: OFPH
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache

Edited by Barry J. Sessle, BDS, MDS, BSc, PhD, FRSC

Official Journal of the American Academy of Orofacial Pain,
the European, Asian, and Ibero-Latin Academies of Craniomandibular
Disorders, and the Australian Academy of Orofacial Pain

ISSN 2333-0384 (print) • ISSN 2333-0376 (online)

Fall 2009
Volume 23 , Issue 4

Share Abstract:

Postoperative Pain Relief After Surgical Removal of Impacted Third Molars: A Single-Blind, Randomized, Controlled Study to Compare Levobupivacaine and Mepivacaine

Vito Crincoli, DDS/Maria Beatrice Di Bisceglie, DDS/Maria Massaro, MD/Rocco Giuliani, MD/Gianfranco Favia, MD, DDS/Nicola Brienza, MD

Pages: 325329
PMID: 19888483

Aim: To compare the efficacy of 0.75% levobupivacaine with that of 3% mepivacaine for pain control after surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Methods: Forty-two subjects (23 females and 19 males, mean age 23.5 4) underwent surgical removal of third molars in two separate sessions. Within each patient, levobupivacaine was used to anesthetize one extraction side and for the other side, mepivacaine. Onset of anesthesia, duration of surgery, lip numbness, timing of pain appearance and analgesic consumption were evaluated. Results: There were no significant differences in onset of anesthesia, duration of surgical procedure, and lower lip numbness between the two groups (P > .05). Timing of pain appearance and of first drug consumption was significantly lower in the mepivacaine group (P < .05). Patients with levobupivacaine anesthesia had significantly lower visual analog (VAS) pain scores at 1 and 2 hours postoperatively than those with mepivacaine anesthesia. Conclusion: Levobupivacaine is a valid alternative to traditional local anesthetics for surgical removal of lower third molars. It presents better pain relief when compared to mepivacaine in the immediate postoperative period as evidenced by lower VAS scores. J OROFAC PAIN 2009;23:325329

Full Text PDF File | Order Article


Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2017 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog