Advertisement

Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 570–575 | Cite as

Comparison of Efficacy of Halstead, Vazirani Akinosi and Gow Gates Techniques for Mandibular Anesthesia

  • B. Sarat Ravi Kiran
  • Vinay M. Kashyap
  • Uday Kiran Uppada
  • Prabhat Tiwari
  • Ashank Mishra
  • Akanksha Sachdeva
Original Article
  • 152 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Traditionally, the “Halstead block” has been widely used to provide anesthesia in mandibular teeth. Two other techniques, the Gow Gates mandibular nerve block and the Akinosi Vazirani closed-mouth mandibular nerve block, are reliable alternatives to the conventional inferior alveolar nerve block. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the onset of anesthesia, anesthetic success and incidence of positive aspiration during administration of local anesthetic solution using the Halstead, Vazirani Akinosi and Gow Gates techniques.

Materials and method

The study involves 210 subjects, divided into three different groups of 70 subjects each receiving Gow Gates, Vazirani Akinosi and conventional inferior alveolar nerve blocks. The onset of anesthesia, positive aspiration and anesthetic success was evaluated.

Results

In Vazirani Akinosi technique group, patients showed highest anesthetic success of 95.71%; there was a significant difference seen between the Gow Gates and Vazirani Akinosi techniques (p = 0.0241*). The mean value of the onset of anesthesia in Gow Gates technique showed the longest 343.71 ± 153.20 s, in Halstead technique it was 177.43 ± 59.94 s, and in Vazirani Akinosi technique it was 192.86 ± 61.20 s. There was a significant difference seen between Gow Gates and Vazirani Akinosi techniques (p = 0.0001*) and Gow Gates and inferior alveolar nerve block techniques (p = 0.0001*).

Conclusion

The Vazirani Akinosi technique was found to be significantly better than the other two techniques with respect to both onset and success of anesthesia. Positive aspirations were slightly higher in the conventional IANB technique compared to the other two, but did not reach statistical significance.

Keywords

Inferior alveolar nerve block Vazirani Akinosi Gow Gates technique Pterygomandibular space 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interests

Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Shinagawa A, Chin VKL, Rabbani SR, Campos AC (2009) A novel approach to intraoral mandibular nerve anesthesia: changing reference planes in the Gow Gates block technique. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67(12):2609–2616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khoury J, Townsend G (2011) Neural blockade anaesthesia of the mandibular nerve and its terminal branches: rationale for different anaesthetic techniques including their advantages and disadvantages. Anesthesiol Res Pract.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/307423 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haas DA (2011) Alternative mandibular nerve block techniques. A review of the Gow-Gates and Akinosi-Vazirani closed-mouth mandibular nerve block techniques. J Am Dent Assoc 142(Suppl 3):8–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aggarwal V, Singla M, Kabi D (2010) Comparative evaluation of anesthetic efficacy of Gow-Gates mandibular conduction anesthesia, Vazirani-Akinosi technique, buccal-plus- lingual infiltrations, and conventional inferior alveolar nerve anesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 109(2):303–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Todorovic L, Stajcic ZPV (1986) Mandibular versus inferior dental anaesthesia: clinical assessment of 3 different techniques. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 15(6):733–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Montagnese TA, Reader A, Melfi R (1984) A comparative study of the Gow-Gates technique and a standard technique for mandibular anesthesia. J Endod 10(4):158–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sisk AL (1986) Evaluation of the Akinosi mandibular block technique in oral surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 44(2):113–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donkor P, Wong J, Punnia-Moorthy A (1990) An evaluation of the closed mouth mandibular block technique. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 19(4):216–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yucel E, Hutchinson IL (1995) A comparative evaluation of the conventional and closed-mouth technique, inferior alveolar nerve block. Aust Dent J 40(1):15–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Martínez Gonzales JM, Benito BP, Fernandez FC, San LHM, Penarrocha MD (2003) A comparative study of direct mandibular nerve block and the Akinosi technique. Med Oral. 8(2):143–149Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Sarat Ravi Kiran
    • 1
  • Vinay M. Kashyap
    • 2
  • Uday Kiran Uppada
    • 1
  • Prabhat Tiwari
    • 1
  • Ashank Mishra
    • 3
  • Akanksha Sachdeva
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgerySri Sai College of Dental SurgeryVikarabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryOxford Dental CollegeBangaloreIndia
  3. 3.Department of PeriodonticsSri Sai College of Dental SurgeryVikarabadIndia
  4. 4.Ridgetop Dental ClinicBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations