This website uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience, improve site performance, and gather analytics. By selecting 'Accept,' you consent to these cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.

HomeBrowseAboutFAQs
Log In
Sign Up
Tooth Avulsion

Efficiency of a Guiding Device for Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block, EZ-Block®, Compared to a Conventional Freehand Administration.

Sponsored by Elsan

About this trial

Last updated 2 years ago

Study ID

EZ-BLOCK

Status

Recruiting

Type

Interventional

Phase

N/A

Placebo

No

Accepting

18-75 Years
18+ Years
All
All

Trial Timing

Ended 7 months ago

What is this trial about?

The success rates reported in the literature for the various truncal anesthesia techniques are extremely variable and have shown a lack of reproducibility of the techniques. The use of the EZ-BLOCK® guidance system would increase this success rate in a significant and reproducible way, as it is based on individualized anatomical foundations and therefore adapted to inter-patient variability. In order to determine its effectiveness in clinical situations encountered in current practice, a comparative clinical study of the 2 techniques (freehand reference technique and using the EZ-BLOCK® system) is necessary.

What are the participation requirements?

Yes

Inclusion Criteria

1. Male or female, 18 years of age or older

2. Dental panoramic radiograph or cone beam examination less than 6 months prior to inclusion

3. Clinical criteria and similar radiographs of the 2 mandibular third molars:

1. Stage of root planing
2. Normoposition, horizontal
3. Type of eruption: disincluded, impacted, impacted
4. Anatomical relationship between inferior alveolar nerve and mandibular wisdom tooth apices similar for both sides

4. Affiliation to a social security scheme

5. Informed consent, dated and signed before any study procedure is performed

No

Exclusion Criteria

1. Pregnant or breastfeeding woman

2. Known allergy to the anesthetic molecule or to a component of the anesthetic carpule

3. Contraindication to the use of vasoconstrictor in dental anesthesia

4. Contraindication to a therapeutic procedure under local anesthesia

5. Patients taking TKA for another medical reason

6. Presence of a cystic pathology related to at least 1 of the 2 mandibular third molars to be extracted

7. Limitation of mouth opening

8. Associated systemic pathology requiring priority management

9. Inability of the patient to comply with study follow-up and scheduled visits (especially for second wisdom tooth avulsion)

10. Patient under legal protection

Locations

Location

Status

Recruiting
Not yet recruiting
Not yet recruiting
Not yet recruiting
Not yet recruiting