Journal of Pierre Fauchard Academy (India Section)

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Articaine Buccal Infiltration Versus Lignocaine Inferior Alveolar Block for Pulpal Anaesthesia in Mandibular Second Premolars – Randomized Control Double Blinded Clinical Trial


Affiliations
1 Dept of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
2 Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Introduction: The study was designed as a randomized double blinded cross over trial comparing the anaesthetic efficacy of buccal infiltration of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine with that of 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve block in mandibular second premolars.
Methods: The study was designed as a cross over trial. Each subject received both the anaesthetic agent and the order of anaesthetic administration was randomized. All the subjects received 1.8 ml of articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in buccal infiltration and 1.8 ml of 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve block in an interval of one week. Pulp sensibility measures were recorded using an electric pulp tester. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 22.
Results: Among the 46 subjects who completed the trial, 82.6% showed successful anaesthesia following articaine buccal infiltration compared with 89.1% following lignocaine inferior alveolar nerve block. There was no statistically significant difference between the success rates of 4% articaine buccal infiltration and 2% lignocaine IANB.
Conclusions: Study concluded that the buccal infiltration of 4% articaine can be used as a viable alternative anaesthetic technique for inferior alveolar nerve block of 2% lignocaine in mandibular second premolars.

Keywords

Articaine, Buccal Infiltration, Lignocaine, Mandibular Second Premolar.
User
Subscription Login to verify subscription
Notifications
Font Size

  • Oliveira PC, Volpato MC, Ramacciato JC, Ranali J. Articaine and lignocaine efficiency in infiltration anesthesia: a pilot study. Br Dent J. 2004;197:45–46.

  • Reader A, Nusstein J, Drum M. Successful Local Anesthesia for Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics. 2012;1–174.

  • Poorni S, Veniashok B, Senthilkumar AD, Indira R, Ramachandran S. Anesthetic efficacy of four percent articaine for pulpal anesthesia by using inferior alveolar nerve block and buccal infiltration techniques in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a prospective randomized double blind clinical trial. J Endod. 2011;37:1603–1607.

  • Malamed SF. Handbook of Local Anesthesia. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book; 1997:63–64.

  • Claffey E, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck M, Weaver J. Anesthetic efficacy of articaine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks in patients with irreversible pulpitis. J Endod. 2004;30:568–571.

  • Shields PW. Further observation on mandibular anasthesia. Aust Dent J. 1977;22:334–338.

  • Al-Jumaili KA, Al-Rawi BA, Yaseen GH. Evaluation of mandibular infiltration compared to mandibular block anesthesia in pediatric dentistry. Al-Rafidain Dent J. 2009;9: 32–37.

  • Yapp KE, Hopcraft MS, Parashos P. Articaine: a review of the literature. Br Dent J. 2011;210:323–329.

  • Jung IY, Kim JH, Kim ES, Lee CY, Lee SJ. An evaluation of buccal infiltrations and inferior alveolar nerve blocks in pulpal anesthesia for mandibular first molars. J Endod. 2008;34:11–13.

  • Robertson D, Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck M. Anesthetic efficacy of articaine and lidocaine in buccal infiltration injections of the mandibular first molar. J Am Dent Assoc. 2007;138:1104–1112.

  • Donaldson D, James-Perdok L, Craig BJ, Derkson GD, Richardson AS. A comparison of Ultracaine DS (articaine Hcl) and Citanest forte (prilocaine Hcl) in maxillary infiltration and mandibular nerve block. J Can Dent Assoc. 1987;53:38–42.

  • Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. Efficacy of articaine: a new amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000;131:635–642.

  • Miksell P, Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck M, Weaver J. A comparison of articaine and lidocaine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks. J Endod. 2005;31:265–270.

  • Gopikrishna V, Pradeep G, Venkateshbabu N. Assessment of pulp vitality: a review. IJPD. 2009;19:3–15.

  • Certosimo A, Archer R. A clinical evaluation of the electric pulp tester as an indicator of local anesthesia. Oper Dent. 1996;21:25–30.

  • Dreven LJ, Reader A, Beck M, Meyers WJ, Weaver J. An evaluation of an electric pulp tester as a measure of analgesia in human vital teeth. J Endod. 1987;13:233–238.

  • Jones VR, Rivera EM, Waltor RE. Comparison of carbon dioxide versus refrigerant spray to determine pulpal responsiveness. J Endod. 2002;28:531–533.

  • Loetscher C, Melton D, Walton R. Injection regimen for anesthesia of the maxillary first molar. J Am Dent Assoc. 1988;117:337–340.

  • Clark S, Reader A, Beck M, Meyers WJ. Anesthetic efficacy of the mylohyoid nerve block and combination inferior alveolar nerve block/mylohyoid nerve block. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;87:557–563.

  • Nusstein J, Reader A, Nist R, Beck M, Meyers WJ. Anesthetic efficacy of supplemental intra-osseous injection of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in irreversible pulpitis. J Endod. 1998;24:487–489.

  • Haas DA, Harper DG, Saso MA, Young ER. Comparison of articaine and prilocaine anesthesia by infiltration in maxillary and mandibular arches. Anesth Prog. 1990;37:230–237.

  • Vahatalo K, Antila H, Lehtinen R. Articaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltration anesthesia. Anesth Prog. 1993;40:114–116.

  • Hass DA, Harper DG, Saso MA, Young ER. Lack of differential effect by Ultracaine DS (articaine Hcl) and Citanest forte (prilocaine Hcl) in maxillary infiltration and mandibular nerve block. J Can Dent Assoc. 1987;53:38–42.

  • Wright GZ, Weinberger SJ, Marti R, Plotzke O. The effectiveness of infiltration anesthesia in the mandibular primary molar region. Pediatr Dent. 1991;13:278–283.

  • McEntire M, Nusstein J, Drum M, Reader A, Beck M. Anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine versus 4% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine as a primary buccal infiltration in the mandibular first molar. J Endod. 2011;37:450–454.

  • Martin M, Nusstein J, Drum M, Reader A, Beck M. Anesthetic efficacy of 1.8 ml versus 3.6 ml of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine as a primary buccal infiltration of the mandibular first molar. J Endod. 2011;37:588–592.

  • Nazum FM, Drum M, Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck M. Anesthetic efficacy of articaine for combination labial plus lingual infiltrations versus labial infiltration in the mandibular lateral incisor. J Endod. 2010;36:952–956.

  • Batista da Silva C, Berto LA, Volpato MC, et al. Anesthetic efficacy of articaine and lidocaine for incisive/mental nerve block. J Endod. 2010;36:438–441.

  • Tortamano IP, Siviero M, Costa CG, Buscariolo IA, Armonia PI. A comparison of the anesthetic efficacy of articaine and lignocaine in patients with irreversible pulpitis. J Endod. 2009;35:165–168.

  • Mathews R, Drum M, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck M. Articaine for supplemental buccal mandibular infiltration anesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis when the inferior alveolar nerve block fails. J Endod. 2009;35:343–346.

  • Corbett IP, Kanaa MD, Whitworth JM, Meechan JG. Articaine infiltration for anesthesia of first molars. J Endod. 2008;34:514–518.

  • Lin J, Chandler NP, Purton D, Monteith B. Appropriate electrode placement site for electric pulp testing first molar teeth. J Endod. 2007;33:1296–1298.


Abstract Views: 253

PDF Views: 0




  • Articaine Buccal Infiltration Versus Lignocaine Inferior Alveolar Block for Pulpal Anaesthesia in Mandibular Second Premolars – Randomized Control Double Blinded Clinical Trial

Abstract Views: 253  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Manali Ramakrishnan Srinivasan
Dept of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
Saravanan Poorni
Dept of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
Yogeshwaran Nitharshika
Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
Davidson Diana
Dept of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
Dasarathan Duraivel
Dept of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India

Abstract


Introduction: The study was designed as a randomized double blinded cross over trial comparing the anaesthetic efficacy of buccal infiltration of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine with that of 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve block in mandibular second premolars.
Methods: The study was designed as a cross over trial. Each subject received both the anaesthetic agent and the order of anaesthetic administration was randomized. All the subjects received 1.8 ml of articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in buccal infiltration and 1.8 ml of 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve block in an interval of one week. Pulp sensibility measures were recorded using an electric pulp tester. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 22.
Results: Among the 46 subjects who completed the trial, 82.6% showed successful anaesthesia following articaine buccal infiltration compared with 89.1% following lignocaine inferior alveolar nerve block. There was no statistically significant difference between the success rates of 4% articaine buccal infiltration and 2% lignocaine IANB.
Conclusions: Study concluded that the buccal infiltration of 4% articaine can be used as a viable alternative anaesthetic technique for inferior alveolar nerve block of 2% lignocaine in mandibular second premolars.

Keywords


Articaine, Buccal Infiltration, Lignocaine, Mandibular Second Premolar.

References