Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study
Abstract Objective 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. Patients and methods A prospective, randomized-controlled, split-mouth clinical study was i...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2023-08-01
|
| Series: | BMC Oral Health |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03292-5 |
| _version_ | 1797556036124540928 |
|---|---|
| author | Haytham Al-Mahalawy Yehia El-Mahallawy Hams H. Abdelrahman Shaimaa Mohsen Refahee |
| author_facet | Haytham Al-Mahalawy Yehia El-Mahallawy Hams H. Abdelrahman Shaimaa Mohsen Refahee |
| author_sort | Haytham Al-Mahalawy |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Objective 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. Patients and methods 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). Results 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). Conclusion 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. ClinicalTrials.org (ID: NCT05223075) 3/2/2022. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T16:57:02Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-91191d7ffe58419183c6d8c89e30a947 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1472-6831 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T16:57:02Z |
| publishDate | 2023-08-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Oral Health |
| spelling | doaj.art-91191d7ffe58419183c6d8c89e30a9472023-11-20T11:06:54ZengBMCBMC Oral Health1472-68312023-08-012311610.1186/s12903-023-03292-5Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical studyHaytham Al-Mahalawy0Yehia El-Mahallawy1Hams H. Abdelrahman2Shaimaa Mohsen Refahee3Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum UniversityOral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria UniversityDental Public Health and Pediatric Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria UniversityOral & Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum UniversityAbstract Objective 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. Patients and methods 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). Results 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). Conclusion 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. ClinicalTrials.org (ID: NCT05223075) 3/2/2022.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03292-5ArticaineLidocaineOnly buccal infiltrationSupplementary lingual injectionMandibular anterior teeth |
| spellingShingle | Haytham Al-Mahalawy Yehia El-Mahallawy Hams H. Abdelrahman Shaimaa Mohsen Refahee Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study BMC Oral Health Articaine Lidocaine Only buccal infiltration Supplementary lingual injection Mandibular anterior teeth |
| title | Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study |
| title_full | Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study |
| title_fullStr | Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study |
| title_short | Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study |
| title_sort | articaine versus lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth a prospective split mouth randomized controlled clinical study |
| topic | Articaine Lidocaine Only buccal infiltration Supplementary lingual injection Mandibular anterior teeth |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03292-5 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT haythamalmahalawy articaineversuslidocaineinonlybuccalinfiltrationanesthesiafortheextractionofmandibularanteriorteethaprospectivesplitmouthrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudy AT yehiaelmahallawy articaineversuslidocaineinonlybuccalinfiltrationanesthesiafortheextractionofmandibularanteriorteethaprospectivesplitmouthrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudy AT hamshabdelrahman articaineversuslidocaineinonlybuccalinfiltrationanesthesiafortheextractionofmandibularanteriorteethaprospectivesplitmouthrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudy AT shaimaamohsenrefahee articaineversuslidocaineinonlybuccalinfiltrationanesthesiafortheextractionofmandibularanteriorteethaprospectivesplitmouthrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudy |