Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Efficacy of Infiltration Anaesthesia of 4% Articaine HCl (buccal) Versus 2% Lignocaine HCl (buccolingual) in Extraction of Mandibular Premolars: A Single Centred, Randomised, Crossover Group Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of buccal and lingual infiltration (B/L I) of 2% lignocaine HCl and buccal infiltration (BI) of 4% articaine for orthodontic extraction of mandibular premolars.

Materials and Method

One hundred and four patients (age group 14–26 years) were selected with the indication of bilateral mandibular first or second premolar extraction for orthodontic treatment. Patients were randomly distributed in 2 groups. Group A received B/L I with lignocaine and Group B for BI with articaine in two different appointments in 2-week interval. The pain scores for each patient were evaluated during extraction using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and verbal pain scale (VPS). Statistical analysis was performed by descriptive and inferential statistics using Chi-square test. The agreement between VAS and VPS was obtained by applying intra-class correlation coefficient.

Results

No pain was experienced during extraction in 77% (VAS) and 79% (VPS) patients infiltrated in group A and 84% (VAS) and 90% (VPS) patients of group B with articaine. The difference between the groups was statistically significant. A strong positive correlation was found between VAS and VPS scores in the both groups.

Conclusion

Buccal infiltration with articaine proved to be an effective alternative to buccal and lingual infiltration with lignocaine in the extraction of mandibular premolars.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

BI:

Buccal infiltration

LI:

Lingual infiltration

B/L I:

Buccal/lingual infiltration

IANB:

Inferior alveolar nerve block

VAS:

Visual analogue scale

VPS:

Visual pain scale

LA:

Local anaesthetics

HCL:

Hydrochloride

Maximum:

Max

References

  1. Somuri V, Rai AB, Pillai M (2013) Extraction of permanent maxillary teeth by only buccal infiltration of articaine. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 12(2):130–132

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D (2001) Articaine hydrochloride—the study of safety of a New Amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc 132:177–185

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Rahn R, Ball B (2001) Local anesthesia in dentistry—articaine and epinephrine for dental anesthesia, 1st edn. 3M ESPE AG, Seefeld

    Google Scholar 

  4. McLure HA, Rubin AP (2005) Review of local anaesthetic agents. Minerva Anesthesiol 71:59–74

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Snoeck M (2012) Articaine: a review of its use for local and regional anesthesia. Local Reg Anesth 5:23–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Abdullah WA, Khalil H, Shetal S (2014) Articaine (4%) buccal infiltration versus lidocaine (2%) inferior alveolar nerve block for mandibular teeth extraction in patients on warfarin treatment. J Anesth Clin Res 5:434–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ashraf H, Kazem M, Dianat O, Noghrehkar F (2013) Efficacy of articaine versus lidocaine in block and infiltration anesthesia administered in teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. J Endod 39:6–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Poorni S, Veniashok B, Senthil Kumar AD, Indira R, Ramachandran S (2011) 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 37:1603–1607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Meechan J (2011) Articaine and lignocaine. Evid Based Dent 12(1):21–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Meechan JG, Jaber AA, Corbett IP, Whitworth JM (2011) Buccal versus lingual articaine infiltration for mandibular tooth anaesthesia: a randomized controlled trial. Int Endod J 44:676–681

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kanaa MD, Whitworth JM, Corbett IP, Meechan JG (2006) Articaine and lidocaine mandibular buccal infiltration anesthesia: a prospective randomized double-blind crossover study. J Endod 32:296–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Robertson D, Nusstein J, Reader A, McCartney M (2007) The anaesthetic efficacy of articaine in buccal infiltration of mandibular posterior teeth. J Am Dent Assoc 138:1104–1112

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Darawade DA, Kumar S, Budhiraja S, Mittal M, Mehta TN (2014) A clinical study of efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride versus 2% lignocaine hydrochloride in dentistry. J Int Oral Health 6(5):81–83

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Kandasamy S, Elangovan R, John R, Kumar N (2015) Removal of maxillary teeth with buccal 4% Articaine without using palatal anesthesia—a comparative double-blind study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg Med Pathol 27:154–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hjermstad MJ, Fainsinger R, Aass N, Kaasa S (2011) Studies comparing numerical rating scales, verbal rating scales, and visual analogue scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. J Pain Symp Manage 41(6):1073–1093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Borchard U, Drouin H (1980) Carticaine: action of the local anesthetic on myelinated nerve fibres. Eur J Pharmacol 62(1):73–79

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Srinivasan N, Kavitha M, Loganathan C, Padmini G (2009) Comparison of anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine for maxillary buccal infiltration in patients with irreversible pulpitis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 107:133–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Evans G, Nusstein J, Drum M, Reader A, Beck M (2008) A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of articaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltrations. J Endod 34:389–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fan S, Chen WL, Yang ZH, Huang ZQ (2009) Comparison of the efficiencies of permanent maxillary tooth removal performed with single buccal infiltration versus routine buccal and palatal injection. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 107:359–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hassan S, Sripathi Rao BH, Sequeria J, Rai G (2011) Efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride and 2% lignocaine hydrochloride in the extraction of maxillary premolars for orthodontic reasons. Ann Maxillofac Surg 1:14–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kambalimath DH, Dolas RS, Kambalimath HV, Agrawal SM (2013) Efficacy of 4% Articaine and 2% Lidocaine: a clinical study. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 12(1):3–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rogers BS, Botero TM, McDonald NJ, Gardner RJ, Peters MC (2014) Efficacy of articaine versus lidocaine as a supplemental buccal infiltration in mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. J Endod 40:753–758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Haase A, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck M, Drum M (2008) Comparing anesthetic efficacy of articaine versus lidocaine as a supplemental buccal infiltration of the mandibular first molar after an inferior alveolar nerve block. J Am Dent Assoc 139(9):1228–1235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Chopra R, Marwaha M, Bansal K, Mittal M (2016) Evaluation of buccal infiltration with articaine and inferior alveolarnerve block with lignocaine for pulp therapy in mandibular primary molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 40(4):301–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Yilmaz K, Tunga U, Özyürek T (2018) Buccal infiltration versus inferior alveolar nerve block in mandibular 2nd premolars with irreversible pulpitis. Niger J Clin Pract 21:473–477

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mikesell P, Nussetein J, Reader A, Beck M, Weaver J (2005) A comparison of articaine and lidocaine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks. J Endodon 31:265–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Dentistry, Government Medical College, Ram Nagar, Chandrapur, Maharashtra, 442402, India

    Ajit Joshi

  2. Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Manubhai Patel Dental College, Near Vishwajoti Ashram, Munjmahuda, Vadodara, Gujarat, 390011, India

    Harleen Kaur Soni

Authors
  1. Ajit Joshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harleen Kaur Soni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ajit Joshi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Ethical Approval

Ethical approval was given by Institutional Research and Ethical Committee (Institutional Review Board) with Approval No.: SDKS/CTRG/Fac2/OS/2016.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all the patients for the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Joshi, A., Soni, H.K. Efficacy of Infiltration Anaesthesia of 4% Articaine HCl (buccal) Versus 2% Lignocaine HCl (buccolingual) in Extraction of Mandibular Premolars: A Single Centred, Randomised, Crossover Group Study. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. 19, 431–437 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-019-01297-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-019-01297-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation