Journal of Isfahan Medical School

Journal of Isfahan Medical School

Comparison the Effects of Two Low-Dose Intravenous Sedation Methods on Anxiety Control during Dental Implant Surgery

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors
Naser Kaviani 1
Sayed Mehdi Ghoreishian 2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry AND Torabinejad Dental Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Isfahan, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
Background: Control of patient anxiety during dental procedure, makes better operating conditions and reduces medical complications in patients. Intravenous conscious sedation is a good method for patient control during dental surgery. This study aimed to compare the effects of two methods of low-dose intravenous sedation regimes for patient control in dental implant surgery.Methods:, 30 patients candidate for dental implant surgery were randomly divided into two groups. Before the surgery, low intravenous doses of combinations of midazolam/fentanylin and midazolam/ketamine were administered for the two group. Sedation score and operation condition in both groups were evaluated and recorded. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney statistical test.Findings: In midazolam/ketamine group, 86.7% and in midazolam/fentanyl group, 80.0% of patients had appropriate sedation. Good operation condition was observed in 73.3% and 80.0% of the patients in midazolam/ketamine and midazolam/fentanyl groups, respectively. There were not any significant differences between the two groups in sedation score and operation conditions.Conclusion: Both evaluated drug regimens can provide good sedation score in over than 80% of patients and good operation condition in over than 70% of patients. So, both drug combinations are useful for patients in implant surgery.
Keywords
Dental implant
Sedation
Anxiety
Midazolam
Ketamine
Fentanyl
  1. Kaviani N, Birang R, Behnia M, Mirghaderi M. Evaluation of medical emergency prevalence in Isfahanian dental offices. J Med Counc I.R. Iran 2007; 25(2): 198-205. [In Persian].
  2. Coulson NS, Buchanan H. Self-reported efficacy of an online dental anxiety support group: a pilot study. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2008; 36(1): 43-6.
  3. Schwartz-Arad D, Bar-Tal Y, Eli I. Effect of stress on information processing in the dental implant surgery setting. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18(1): 9-12.
  4. Craig DC, Wildsmith JA. Conscious sedation for dentistry: an update. Br Dent J 2007; 203(11): 629-31.
  5. Wiener-Kronish J, Gropper MA. Consious sedation.1st ed. Philadelphia, PA: Hanley and Belfus INC; 2001. p. 8-10, 100-2.
  6. Hermes D, Matthes M, Saka B. Treatment anxiety in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Results of a German multi-centre trial. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2007; 35(6-7): 316-21.
  7. Singh N, Pandey RK, Saksena AK, Jaiswal JN. A comparative evaluation of oral midazolam with other sedatives as premedication in pediatric dentistry. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2002; 26(2): 161-4.
  8. Barash PG, Gullen BF, Stoelting RK. Clinical anesthesia. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001. p. 33-5.
  9. Gerecke M. Chemical structure and properties of midazolam compared with other benzodiazepines. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1983; 16(Suppl 1): 11S-6S.
  10. Craig DC, Boyle CA, Fleming GJ, Palmer P. A sedation technique for implant and periodontal surgery. J Clin Periodontol 2000; 27(12): 955-9.
  11. Morse Z, Sano K, Kanri T. Effects of a midazolam-ketamine admixture in human volunteers. Anesth Prog 2004; 51(3): 76-9.
  12. Koirala B, Pandey RK, Saksen AK, Kumar R, Sharma S. A comparative evaluation of newer sedatives in conscious sedation. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2006; 30(4): 273-6.
  13. Leitch J, Macpherson A. Current state of sedation/analgesia care in dentistry. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2007; 20(4): 384-7.
  14. Rodgers SF. Safety of intravenous sedation administered by the operating oral surgeon: the first 7 years of office practice. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005; 63(10): 1478-83.
  15. Juodzbalys G, Giedraitis R, Machiulskiene V, Huys LW, Kubilius R. New method of sedation in oral surgery. J Oral Implantol 2005; 31(6): 304-8.
  16. Lind LJ, Mushlin PS, Schnitman PA. Monitored anesthesia care for dental implant surgery: analysis of effectiveness and complications. J Oral Implantol 1990; 16(2): 106-13.
  17. Runes J, Strom C. Midazolam intravenous conscious sedation in oral surgery. A retrospective study of 372 cases. Swed Dent J 1996; 20(1-2): 29-33.
  18. Blankstein KC, Anderson JA. A double-blind comparison of low-dose intravenous ketamine and methohexital in adults. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991; 49(5): 468-75.
  19. Dental Sedation Teachers Group (DSTG). Logbook of clinical experience in conscious sedation [Online]. [cited 2010 Jun]; Available from: URL:www.dstg.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/sedationlogbook.doc.
  20. Chung F, Chan VW, Ong D. A post-anesthetic discharge scoring system for home readiness after ambulatory surgery. J Clin Anesth 1995; 7(6): 500-6.
  21. Umino M, Nagao M. Systemic diseases in elderly dental patients. Int Dent J 1993; 43(3): 213-8.
  22. Ghezzi EM, Ship JA. Systemic diseases and their treatments in the elderly: impact on oral health. J Public Health Dent 2000; 60(4): 289-96.
  23. Dionne RA, Yagiela JA, Moore PA, Gonty A, Zuniga J, Beirne OR. Comparing efficacy and safety of four intravenous sedation regimens in dental outpatients. J Am Dent Assoc 2001; 132(6): 740-51.
  24. Lepere AJ, Slack-Smith LM. Average recovery time from a standardized intravenous sedation protocol and standardized discharge criteria in the general dental practice setting. Anesth Prog 2002; 49(3): 77-81.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 32, Issue 287 - Serial Number 287
March and April 2014
Pages 768-775

  • Receive Date 21 November 2013
  • Accept Date 06 April 2022