Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study.
Articaine
Lidocaine
Mandibular anterior teeth
Only buccal infiltration
Supplementary lingual injection
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 08 2023
28 08 2023
Historique:
received:
11
04
2023
accepted:
06
08
2023
medline:
31
8
2023
pubmed:
29
8
2023
entrez:
28
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To investigate the effectiveness of a single labial infiltration of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth without an additional lingual injection. A prospective, randomized-controlled, split-mouth clinical study was implemented. Healthy adult patients seeking bilateral extraction of mandibular anterior teeth were included in this study. Teeth extractions were randomly assigned to two equal groups, where one mandibular anterior tooth was extracted using a solitary labial infiltration of either 4% articaine (the study group) or 2% lidocaine (the control group). After 14 days, the other mandibular anterior tooth was extracted using the other local anesthetic agent. The selection of the anesthetic agent injected in the first session was done in a randomized fashion. After 5 min of local anesthetic injection, the tooth was extracted, and each patient was asked to record the intensity of the extraction pain using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Thirty-one patients were included in the study. The efficacy of a single labial injection for mandibular anterior teeth extraction was established by the fact that none of the patients in the study or control group required re-administration of local anesthesia. The mean VAS for pain control during tooth extraction was 1.16 ± 0.93 for the articaine group and 1.71 ± 0.90 for the lidocaine group. The pain score showed a statistically significant decrease in the articaine group compared to that in the lidocaine group (P = 0.017). Although the anesthetic effects of only buccal infiltration of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine for extraction of mandibular anterior teeth were comparable, the use of 4% articaine would have more effective and predictable outcomes. ORG: (ID: NCT05223075) 3/2/2022.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37641122
doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03292-5
pii: 10.1186/s12903-023-03292-5
pmc: PMC10463316
doi:
Substances chimiques
Carticaine
D3SQ406G9X
Lidocaine
98PI200987
Anesthetics, Local
0
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT05223075']
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
604Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Malamed SF. Handbook of local anesthesia-e-book. Elsevier health sciences; 2019.
Meechan J, Ledvinka J. Pulpal anaesthesia for mandibular central incisor teeth: a comparison of infiltration and intraligamentary injections. Int Endod J. 2002;35:629–34.
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00532.x
pubmed: 12190903
Meechan JG. Infiltration anesthesia in the mandible. Dent Clin. 2010;54(4):621–9.
DeJong R, Local Anesthetics CV, Mosby. St. Louis, MO. 1994:1101.
Bataineh AB, Nusair YM, Al-Rahahleh RQ. Comparative study of articaine and lidocaine without palatal injection for maxillary teeth extraction. Clin Oral Invest. 2019;23:3239–48.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2738-x
Ege B, Demirkol M. Is the only buccal infiltration anesthesia enough for extraction of mandibular anterior incisors and premolar teeth? A split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Invest. 2021;25:3077–85.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03628-3
Al-Mahalawy HA, El-Mahallawy Y. Is nasopalatine nerve block still mandated for the extraction of maxillary anterior teeth? Br Dent J. 2020;228:865–8.
doi: 10.1038/s41415-020-1632-5
pubmed: 32541749
Robertson D, Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck M, McCartney M. The anesthetic efficacy of articaine in buccal infiltration of mandibular posterior teeth. J Am Dent Association. 2007;138:1104–12.
doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2007.0324
Al-Mahalawy H, Abuohashish H, Chathoth S, Al-Masoud N, Al-Jandan B. Articaine versus lidocaine concentration in the palatal tissues after supraperiosteal buccal infiltration anesthesia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;76:315. e1-. e7.
doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2017.10.001
Garisto GA, Gaffen AS, Lawrence HP, Tenenbaum HC, Haas DA. Occurrence of paresthesia after dental local anesthetic administration in the United States. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010;141(7):836–44.
doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2010.0281
pubmed: 20592403
Pogrel MA. Permanent nerve damage from inferior alveolar nerve blocks: a current update. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2012;40(10):795–7.
pubmed: 23316560
Bataineh AB, Alwarafi MA. Patient’s pain perception during mandibular molar extraction with articaine: a comparison study between infiltration and inferior alveolar nerve block. Clin Oral Invest. 2016;20:2241–50.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-016-1712-8
Jaber A, Whitworth J, Corbett I, Al-Baqshi B, Kanaa M, Meechan J. The efficacy of infiltration anaesthesia for adult mandibular incisors: a randomised double-blind cross-over trial comparing articaine and lidocaine buccal and buccal plus lingual infiltrations. Br Dent J. 2010;209:E16–E.
doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2010.974
pubmed: 20953168
Meechan JG. The use of the mandibular infiltration anesthetic technique in adults. J Am Dent Association. 2011;142:19S–24S.
doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2011.0343
Association GAotWM. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. J Am Coll Dent. 2014;81:14–8.
Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Trials. 2010;11:1–8.
doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-11-32
Brandt RG, Anderson PF, McDonald NJ, Sohn W, Peters MC. The pulpal anesthetic efficacy of articaine versus lidocaine in dentistry: a meta-analysis. J Am Dent Association. 2011;142:493–504.
doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2011.0219
Soysa NS, Soysa IB, Alles N. Efficacy of articaine vs lignocaine in maxillary and mandibular infiltration and block anesthesia in the dental treatments of adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Investig Clin Dent. 2019;10(3):e12404.
doi: 10.1111/jicd.12404
pubmed: 30887677
Skjevik ÃA, Haug BE, Lygre H, Teigen K. Intramolecular hydrogen bonding in articaine can be related to superior bone tissue penetration: a molecular dynamics study. Biophys Chem. 2011;154:18–25.
doi: 10.1016/j.bpc.2010.12.002
pubmed: 21227568