OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to compare the anesthetic properties of 4 % Articaine hydrochloride and 2 % Lidocaine both with 1:100,000 epinephrine for mandibular inferior alveolar nerve anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Thirty healthy patients were included in this randomized double-blind clinical cross over study. Each subject received each test solution at different times. Inferior alveolar nerve block anesthesia was used for extraction of bilateral impacted mandibular third molar on different occassions. The time of onset of action, duration of anesthesia, efficacy of anesthesia, hemodynamic parameters and oxygen saturation were monitored during the procedure. A visual analog scale was used to assess pain during surgery, and thus subjectively evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of the two solutions. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were seen in the onset and duration of anesthesia between the Articaine and Lidocaine solutions. CONCLUSIONS: 4 % Articaine offers better clinical performance than 2 % Lidocaine, particularly in terms of latency and duration of the anesthetic effect. However, no statistically significant differences in anesthetic efficacy were recorded between the two solutions.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to compare the anesthetic properties of 4 % Articaine hydrochloride and 2 % Lidocaine both with 1:100,000 epinephrine for mandibular inferior alveolar nerve anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty healthy patients were included in this randomized double-blind clinical cross over study. Each subject received each test solution at different times. Inferior alveolar nerve block anesthesia was used for extraction of bilateral impacted mandibular third molar on different occassions. The time of onset of action, duration of anesthesia, efficacy of anesthesia, hemodynamic parameters and oxygen saturation were monitored during the procedure. A visual analog scale was used to assess pain during surgery, and thus subjectively evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of the two solutions. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were seen in the onset and duration of anesthesia between the Articaine and Lidocaine solutions. CONCLUSIONS: 4 % Articaine offers better clinical performance than 2 % Lidocaine, particularly in terms of latency and duration of the anesthetic effect. However, no statistically significant differences in anesthetic efficacy were recorded between the two solutions.
Authors: Bella L Colombini; Karin C S Modena; Adriana M Calvo; Vivien T Sakai; Fernando P M Giglio; Thiago J Dionísio; Alceu S Trindade; José R P Lauris; Carlos F Santos Journal: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod Date: 2006-03-24
Authors: J C Baluga; R Casamayou; E Carozzi; N López; R Anale; R Borges; E Alvarez; C Baez; C Cedrés; C Guelfi; H Larrosa; R Sassi; Y Polero Journal: Allergol Immunopathol (Madr) Date: 2002 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.667
Authors: Carlos F Santos; Karin C S Modena; Fernando P M Giglio; Vivien T Sakai; Adriana M Calvo; Bella L Colombini; Carla R Sipert; Thiago J Dionísio; Flávio A C Faria; Alceu S Trindade; José R P Lauris Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 1.895
Authors: Leonardo V L Gregorio; Fernando P M Giglio; Vivien T Sakai; Karin C S Modena; Bella L Colombini; Adriana M Calvo; Carla R Sipert; Thiago J Dionísio; José R P Lauris; Flávio A C Faria; Alceu S Trindade Junior; Carlos F Santos Journal: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod Date: 2008-04-16
Authors: Geoffrey St George; Alyn Morgan; John Meechan; David R Moles; Ian Needleman; Yuan-Ling Ng; Aviva Petrie Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-07-10