Tecnología de vanguardia C-CLAD* para una anestesia dental sin esfuerzo: *dispositivo de anestesia local controlado por ordenador

Dentapen® ofrece a los pacientes una mayor comodidad al reducir significativamente el dolor y eliminar miedo a las inyecciones.
Dentapen® ayuda a los dentistas a evitar la tensión muscular causada por las repetidas inyecciones manuales.
Adecuado para todas las técnicas de anestesia: palatina, infiltración, bloqueo e intraligencial.

¿Cómo funciona?

Why the Dentapen C-CLAD


Operational in seconds:
automatic priming at onset of device and intelligent aspiration to ensure correct injection location.


One click activation, no setup time necessary. The Dentapen® microprocessor continuously (hundreds of time per second) monitors the pressure applied to the tissues and adapts the injection flow accordingly. The high quality gears and engine components are similar to the ones used in the Swiss luxury watch industry.


These measurements are processed by the advanced control algorithms in order to provide a smooth injection flow. Dentapen® eliminates overpressure inherent to manual injections – the key to attain perfect, painless injection.


The high performance of Lithium batteries enables Dentapen® to function at maximum capacity to complete continuous calculations and perform the perfect injection. With unparalleled power Dentapen® can push up to 13kg of force - that is 260x its own weight !


The use of cutting-edge manufacturing technology, such as a flex-PCB, allows us to create the most compact C-CLAD injector in the world. The design and ergonomics result from a 6 year R&D process.


Cost conscious and hygienic:
fully autoclavable accessories, single-use protective sleeves.


Dentapen® is especially suited for pediatric dentistry. The different modes and speeds allow injections to be almost unnoticeable and the non-threatening design lowers fear in kids.

Sobre la tecnología C-CLAD

“El criterio número uno en elegir a un dentista es: Un dentista que puede inyectar anestesia sin dolorHow dentists are judged by patients, St Georges J, Dent Today, 2004.
“La premisa detrás de los dispositivos de inyección controlados por ordenador es en parte, que pueden hacer lo que nuestras manos no pueden. Es decir, administrar anestesia local a un ritmo constante a pesar de la densidad del tejido.” Pain Control Patient Management: A review of Computer Controlled Injection Devices, David Isen, 2001
“El mayor control sobre la jeringa y las velocidades fijas de flujo resultan en una experiencia de inyección significativamente mejorada, como se ha demostrado en muchos estudios clínicos realizados con dispositivos C-CLAD en odontología. Un número cada vez mayor de ensayos clínicos en medicina también demuestran los beneficios mensurables de la tecnología C-CLAD.”

“La estética local ha hecho un gran avance en la odontología y ha cambiado en gran medida las perspectivas de los pacientes sobre los procedimientos dentales.” Advances in dental local anaesthesia techniques and devices: An update, Payal Saxena, 2013.

“Los recientes avances en los sistemas de C-CLAD han hecho que la administración de anestesia local a los pacientes están mucho más cómodos y, con las inyecciones de PDL, AMSA y P-ASA, considerablemente más exitoso.”

“La capacidad de aplicar inyecciones indoloras y un nivel y duración deseables de la anestesia resulta en la reducción del miedo del paciente, la reducción del estrés del paciente (y por lo tanto la reducción del estrés para el dentista) y puede ayudar al paciente a cumplir con el tratamiento dental actual y futuro.” Aesthetic Agents and C-CLAD in Dentistry, Stanley F Malamed, 2010.

“Los resultados indicaron que el sistema era muy preferido a las técnicas de inyección tradicionales,
sin importar el arco y el cuadrante que reciba la inyección. Varios factores pueden haber contribuído a esta preferencia, incluyendo el aumento de la comodidad del paciente, la aparencia no amenazante del instrumento, y la falta de entumecimiento facial residual comúnmente asociado con las inyecciones de estética oral.” A computer-controlled aesthetic delivery system in a periodontal practice: patient satisfaction and acceptance, J Esthet Restor Dent. 2002.
“La introducción de sistemas de administración de anestesia local controlados por computadora (C-CLAD) ha mejoró la administración de anestesia local para muchos dentistas y sus pacientes. Estos dispositivos han demostrado una gran utilidad en la entrega indolora de la anestesia dental local” Handbook of Local Anesthesia, Stanley F Malamed, 2012.

Bibliography / Other References

1. Kleinknecht RA, Klepac RK, Alexander LD. Origins and characteristics of fear of dentistryJ Am Dent Assoc. 1973;
2. Milgrom P, Mancl L, King B, Weinstein P. Origins of childhood dental fearBehav Res Ther. 1995;
3. Malamed SF. Local anesthesiaJ Calif Dent Assoc. 1998;
4. Saloum FS, Baumgartner JC, Marshall G, Tinkle J. A clinical comparison of pain perception to the Wand and a traditional syringeOral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000;
5. Hochman M, Chiarello D, Hochman CB, Lopatkin R, Pergola S. Computerized local anesthetic delivery vs. traditional syringe technique. Subjective pain response. N Y State Dent J. 1997;
6. Feda M, Al Amoudi N, Sharaf A, Hanno A, Farsi N, Masoud I, et al. A comparative study of children’s pain reactions and perceptions to AMSA injection using CCLAD versus traditional injectionsJ Clin Pediatr Dent. 2010;
7. Thoppe-Dhamodhara YK, Asokan S, John BJ, Pollachi-Ramakrishnan G, Ramachandran P, Vilvanathan P. Cartridge syringe vs computer controlled local anesthetic delivery system: Pain related behaviour over two sequential visits – a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Exp Dent. 2015;
8. Mittal M, Kumar A, Srivastava D, Sharma P, Sharma S. Pain Perception: Computerized versus Traditional Local Anesthesia in Pediatric PatientsJ Clin Pediatr Dent. 2015;
9. Langthasa M, Yeluri R, Jain AA, Munshi AK. Comparison of the pain perception in children using comfort control syringe and a conventional injection technique during pediatric dental proceduresJ Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2012;
10. Baghlaf K, Alamoudi N, Elashiry E, Farsi N, El Derwi DA, Abdullah AM. The pain-related behavior and pain perception associated with computerized anesthesia in pulpotomies of mandibular primary molars: A randomized controlled trial. Quintessence Int. 2015;
11. Alamoudi NM, Baghlaf KK, Elashiry EA, Farsi NM, El Derwi DA, Bayoumi AM. The effectiveness of computerized anesthesia in primary mandibular molar pulpotomy: A randomized controlled trialQuintessence Int. 2016;
12. Kandiah P, Tahmassebi JF. Comparing the onset of maxillary infiltration local anaesthesia and pain experience using the conventional technique vs. the Wand in childrenBr Dent J. 2012;
13. Tahmassebi JF, Nikolaou M, Duggal MS. A comparison of pain and anxiety associated with the administration of maxillary local analgesia with Wand and conventional technique. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2009;
14. Versloot J, Veerkamp JS, Hoogstraten J. Pain behaviour and distress in children during two sequential dental visits: comparing a computerised anaesthesia delivery system and a traditional syringeBr Dent J. 2008;
15. Al Amoudi N, Feda M, Sharaf A, Hanno A, Farsi N. Assessment of the anesthetic effectiveness of anterior and middle superior alveolar injection using a computerized device versus traditional technique in childrenJ Clin Pediatr Dent. 2008;
16. Klein U, Hunzeker C, Hutfless S, Galloway A. Quality of anesthesia for the maxillary primary anterior segment in pediatric patients: comparison of the P-ASA nerve block using CompuMed delivery system vs traditional supraperiosteal injectionsJ Dent Child (Chic) 2005;
17. Palm AM, Kirkegaard U, Poulsen S. The wand versus traditional injection for mandibular nerve block in children and adolescents: perceived pain and time of onset. Pediatr Dent. 2004;
18. Ram D, Peretz B. The assessment of pain sensation during local anesthesia using a computerized local anesthesia (Wand) and a conventional syringeJ Dent Child (Chic) 2003;
19. Kammerer PW, Schiegnitz E, von Haussen T, Shabazfar N, Kämmerer P, Willershausen B, et al. Clinical efficacy of a computerised device (STA) and a pressure syringe (VarioJect INTRA) for intraligamentary anaesthesiaEur J Dent Educ. 2015;
20. Singh S, Garg A. Comparison of the pain levels of computer controlled and conventional anesthesia techniques in supraperiosteal injections: a randomized controlled clinical trialActa Odontol Scand. 2013;
21. Chang H, Noh J, Lee J, Kim S, Koo KT, Kim TI, et al. Relief of Injection Pain During the Delivery of Local Anesthesia by Computer-Controlled Anesthetic Delivery System for Periodontal Surgery: Randomised Clinical Controlled TrialJ Periodontol. 2016;
22. Beneito-Brotons R, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Ata-Ali J, Penarrocha M. Intraosseous anesthesia with solution injection controlled by a computerized system versus conventional oral anesthesia: a preliminary studyMed Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012;
23. Lee S, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck M, Weaver J. Anesthetic efficacy of the anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) injectionAnesth Prog. 2004;
24. Loomer PM, Perry DA. Computer-controlled delivery versus syringe delivery of local anesthetic injections for therapeutic scaling and root planingJ Am Dent Assoc. 2004;
25. Shah M, Shivaswamy S, Jain S, Tambwekar S. A clinical comparison of pain perception and extent of area anesthetized by Wand ((R)) and a traditional syringeJ Indian Soc Periodontol. 2012;
26. Özer S, Yaltirik M, Kirli I, Yargic I. A comparative evaluation of pain and anxiety levels in 2 different anesthesia techniques: locoregional anesthesia using conventional syringe versus intraosseous anesthesia using a computer-controlled system (Quicksleeper) Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;
27. Yenisey M. Comparison of the pain levels of computercontrolled and conventional anesthesia techniques in prosthodontic treatmentJ Appl Oral Sci. 2009;
28. Yesilyurt C, Bulut G, Tasdemir T. Pain perception during inferior alveolar injection administered with the Wand or conventional syringeBr Dent J. 2008;
29. Sumer M, Misir F, Koyuturk AE. Comparison of the Wand with a conventional techniqueOral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;
30. Nusstein J, Lee S, Reader A, Beck M, Weaver J. Injection pain and postinjection pain of the anterior middle superior alveolar injection administered with the Wand or conventional syringeOral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004;
31. Rosenberg ES. A computer-controlled anesthetic delivery system in a periodontal practice: patient satisfaction and acceptanceJ Esthet Restor Dent. 2002.