Patients who undergo implant or bone augmentation procedures while under IV sedation may experience less intraoperative pain and anxiety and early recovery. The study was published recently in the Journal of Dentistry.
Additionally, hemodynamic parameters, including blood pressure, were more stable in patients who were administered IV sedation, the authors wrote.
“Intravenous sedation provides a safe and effective alternative for implant dentistry surgery, particularly for anxious or pain-sensitive individuals,” wrote the authors, led by Tao Wu of the Center for Prosthodontics and Implant Dentistry at Wuhan University in China (J Dent, June 27, 2026).
In the past, studies have investigated how surgical techniques, prosthetic designs, and other factors have measured the effect on patient-reported outcomes, but there is limited evidence that addresses how implant procedures shape outcomes, according to the story.
To explore the effect of IV sedation on patient outcomes during implant and bone augmentation procedures, a prospective observational cohort study was conducted. The study included 40 patients having three or more implants, with or without bone augmentation, placed. Half of the patients underwent the procedure with local anesthesia, and the other half were administered IV sedation. Those who received IV sedation had a mix of remimazolam, dexmedetomidine, alfentanil, and low-dose esketamine, the authors wrote.
Also, blood pressure, heart rate, and arterial oxygen saturation, as well as postoperative pain, were measured.
IV sedation was linked to lower intraoperative pain (0.5 [IQR: 0∼2.75] vs. 3.25 ± 2.40, p = 0.003), anxiety (1 [IQR: 0∼2.75] vs. 4 [IQR: 3∼6], p = 0.001), and experienced discomfort (2 [IQR: 1∼3.75] vs. 4.15 ± 2.16, p = 0.016), and shortened perceived treatment duration (2.90 ± 2.34 vs. 5 [IQR: 4∼5], p = 0.020), the authors wrote.
Early postsurgical pain was less in the sedation group from Days 1 to 4 (p = 0.003 to 0.010). Under sedation, patients’ hemodynamic parameters were more stable. Systolic blood pressure (116.42 ± 13.32 vs. 144.11 ± 17.42 mmHg, p < 0.001), diastolic blood pressure (73.21 ± 10.28 vs. 82.37 ± 11.03 mmHg, p = 0.012), and heart rate were lower in those who underwent sedation (71.00 [IQR: 62.50∼79.25] vs. 85.00 ± 10.72 bpm, p = 0.021), they wrote.
However, the study had limitations. Instead of focusing on long-term effects on implant integration and wound healing, the study only looked at short-term outcomes, the authors wrote.
“Intravenous sedation may enhance the patient experience during implant and/or bone augmentation procedures by reducing intraoperative pain and anxiety, improving hemodynamic stability, and promoting better early-postoperative recovery and OHRQoL (oral health-related quality of life),” Wu and colleagues wrote.
