XXXX or @entity4671 for induction of dental anaesthesia.

@entity1 @entity1508 @entity2358 @entity26 @entity158 @entity4671 @entity3810 @entity3694 @entity1209
Ninety-two @entity1 who presented for outpatient dental extractions received @entity3694 (1.5 mg . kg-1, 46 @entity1 ) or @entity4671 (0.3 mg . kg-1, 23 @entity1 and 0.2 mg . kg-1, 23 @entity1 ). The induction characteristics of both drugs such as @entity158 on injection, @entity2358 and respiratory difficulties were comparable and the theoretical disadvantages of @entity4671 for dental anaesthetics did not prove troublesome in practice. Muscle movements did not interfere with the dentists' manipulations and @entity158 on injection into veins of the antecubital fossa did not occur. The duration of operation for up to four extractions was three minutes and, following induction, anaesthesia was maintained with @entity3810 , @entity26 and @entity1508 . Recovery was assessed by grading consciousness, airway control and motor activity. All the @entity1 could maintain their airways one minute after the end of operation. The incidence of @entity1209 was significantly greater in the @entity4671 group.
