The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 133, No 6, 693.
© 2002 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gasteier, A. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Gasteier, A. C.

LETTERS

INJECTION COMPLICATIONS

I read with interest "Complications of an Intra-Arterial Injection From an Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block" by Dr. Brian Webber and colleagues (December JADA).

Although I am a clinical dentist and not a researcher or anatomist, I question the logic supporting the authors’ supposition that the complications were a result of injecting into the inferior alveolar artery.

In order for the symptoms listed to occur, the anesthetic had to travel superiorly to reach the internal maxillary artery. I find this to be very unlikely if the injection is administered properly. The arterial pressure present each time the heart contracts would make it highly unlikely that the anesthetic would reach the internal maxillary artery. In addition to the arterial pressure, it would be necessary for the anesthetic to travel superiorly, which defies the law of physics. The only way this could occur would seem to be a rapid, forceful injection of anesthetic.

If the injection was done slowly and without excessive pressure, I think the anesthetic must be deposited directly into the internal maxillary artery in order to achieve the symptoms noted.

We are instructed to hold the syringe in a horizontal position when administering a block injection. If it is angled superiorly instead, I believe it would be possible to enter the internal maxillary artery. Perhaps a greater likelihood is that the patient’s head is positioned incorrectly with the chin superior to the angle of the ramus. In this position it would be very easy to inject into the inferior maxillary artery.

I also don’t see the need for a vasoconstrictor for routine dental procedures, if bleeding is not anticipated. The effects of intravascular administration of epinephrine are very unsettling to the patient and the practitioner. The presence of the vasoconstrictor also prolongs the adverse effects of the unintended intravascular injection.

I believe that proper positioning of the patient’s head, holding the syringe in a horizontal position, and using non-epinephrine local anesthetic makes this type of anesthetic reaction very unlikely.



Alan C. Gasteier, D.D.S.

Batavia, Ill.



This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gasteier, A. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Gasteier, A. C.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS