Document Detail


Comparative study of the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine in inferior alveolar nerve block during surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  17322803     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND: A comparative study is made of the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine, both with epinephrine 1:100,000, in truncal block of the inferior alveolar nerve during the surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized double-blind clinical trial was conducted of 30 patients programmed for the bilateral surgical extraction of symmetrical lower third molars in the context of the Master of Oral Surgery and Implantology (University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain). Following the obtainment of informed consent, two operators performed surgery on an extemporaneous basis, using as local anesthetic 4% articaine or 2% lidocaine with the same concentration of vasoconstrictor (epinephrine 1:100,000). The study variables for each anesthetic were: latency (time to action) and duration of anesthetic effect, the amount of anesthetic solution used, and the need of re-anesthetize the surgical zone. A visual analog scale was used to assess pain during surgery, and thus subjectively evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of the two solutions. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences (p = 0.003) were observed in the mean duration of anesthetic effect (220.86 min. for 4% articaine vs. 168.20 min. for 2% lidocaine). Latency, the amount of anesthetic solution and the need to re-anesthetize the surgical field showed clinical differences in favor of articaine, though statistical significance was not reached. The pain scores indicated similar anesthetic efficacy with both solutions. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained suggest that 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:
Alejandro Sierra Rebolledo; Esther Delgado Molina; Leonardo Berini Aytís; Cosme Gay Escoda
Related Documents :
6793183 - Improved pain relief after thoracotomy: use of cryoprobe and morphine infusion.
19829093 - Sudden severe abdominal pain after a single low dose of paracetamol/codein in a cholecy...
11143233 - Gamma knife radiosurgery for idiopathic and secondary trigeminal neuralgia.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial     Date:  2007-03-01
Journal Detail:
Title:  Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal     Volume:  12     ISSN:  1698-6946     ISO Abbreviation:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal     Publication Date:  2007 Mar 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2007-02-26     Completed Date:  2007-03-13     Revised Date:  2009-12-11    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101231694     Medline TA:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal     Country:  Spain    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  E139-44     Citation Subset:  D; IM    
Affiliation:
University of Barcelona Dental School, Barcelona, Spain.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Adolescent
Adult
Anesthesia, Dental
Anesthetics, Local*
Carticaine*
Epinephrine
Female
Humans
Lidocaine*
Male
Mandibular Nerve*
Molar, Third / surgery*
Nerve Block / methods*
Pain Measurement
Spain
Tooth, Impacted / surgery*
Chemical
Reg. No./Substance:
0/Anesthetics, Local; 137-58-6/Lidocaine; 23964-58-1/Carticaine; 51-43-4/Epinephrine

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  An observational study of the frequency of supernumerary teeth in a population of 2000 patients.
Next Document:  Langerhans cell histiocytosis in the maxillofacial area in adults. Report of three cases.