COMPARING THE EFFICIENCY OF 2% LIDOCAINE AND 4% ARTICAINE AS A LOCAL ANESTHETIC AGENT IN CHILDREN

Manisha Nair; Ganesh Jeevanandan; Meenakshi Mohan

doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2018.v11i5.24440

Authors

Manisha Nair Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Ganesh Jeevanandan Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Meenakshi Mohan Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2018.v11i5.24440

Keywords:

Articaine, Lidocaine, Pain assessment, Visual analog scale

Abstract

Â Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the anesthetic efficiency of conventional 2% lidocaine with 4% articaine when infiltrated in the maxillary arch for pediatric patients during pulp therapy and extraction.

Methodology: A randomized control trial was done with 45 children (n=45) of the age group 4â€“8 years. The children were randomly allotted to two experimental groups. Group A â€“ Children received 2% Lidocaine HCL infilteration both buccally and palatally, Group B â€“ Children received 2% Lidocaine infilteration buccally and Group C â€“ Children received 4% Articaine infilteration baccally as local anesthetic agent. Post treatment, pain assessment was done using visual analog scale.

Results: Articaine group had significantly lower pain scores when compared to the lidocaine group.

Conclusion: Articaine infiltration can be considered as an effective alternative for the conventional lidocaine infiltration.

Â

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Le Baron S, Zeltzer L. Assessment of acute pain and anxiety in children and adolescnts by self-reports, obserever reports, and a behaviour checklist. J Consult Clin Psychol 1984;52:729-38.

Malamed SF. Handbook of Local Anaesthesia. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1997.

Meechan JG, Day PF, McMillan AS. Local anesthesia in the palate: A comparison of techniques and solutions. Anesth Prog 2000;47:139.

Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. Efficacy of articaine: A new amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc 2000;131:635-42.

Vree TB, Baars AM, van Oss GE, Booij LH. High performance liquid chromatography and preliminary pharmacokinetics of articaine and its 2-carboxy metabolite in human serum and urine. J Chromatogr 1988;424:440-4.

Ferger P, Marxkors R. A new anesthetic in dental prosthetics. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 1973;28:87-9.

Winther JE, Nathalang B. Effectivity of a new local analgesic Hoe 40 045. Scand J Dent Res 1972;80:272-8.

Winther JE, Patirupanusara B. Evaluation of carticaine-a new local analgesic. Int J Oral Surg 1974;3:422-7.

Raab WH, Muller R, Muller HF. Comparative studies on the anesthetic efficiency of 2% and 4% articaine. Quint 1990;41:1208-16.

Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. Articaine hydrochloride: A study of the safety of a new amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc 2001;132:177-85.

Hasnain MS, Rishishwar P, Ali S. Use of cashew bark exudate gum in the preparation of 4 % lidocaine HCL topical gels. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2017;9:146-50.

Rajab NA, Rassol AA, Assaf SM, Sallam AS. Preparation and evaluation of fentanyl transdremal patches using lidocaine as a model drug and azelaic acid as a penetration enhancer. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2014;6:615-20.

Haas DA. An update on local anesthetics in dentistry. J Can Dent Assoc 2002;68:546-51.

Kung J, McDonagh M, Sedgley CM. Does articaine provide an advantage over lidocaine in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis? J Endod 2015;41:1784-94.

Wright GZ, Weinberger SJ, Marti R, Plotzke O. The effectiveness of infiltration anesthesia in the mandibular primary molar region. Pediatr Dent 1991;13:278-83.

Luqman U, Janjua OS, Ashfaq M, Irfan H, Mushtaq S, Bilal A. Comparison of articaine and lignocaine for uncomplicated maxillary exodontia. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2015;25:181-4.

Fan S, Chen WL, Yang ZH, Huang ZQ. 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 2009;107:359-63.

Somuri AV, Rai AB, Pillai M. Extraction of permanent maxillary teeth by only buccal infiltration of articaine. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2013;12:130-2.

Oertel R, Rahn R, Kirch W. Clinical pharmacokinetics of articaine. Clin Pharmacokinet 1997;33:417-25.

Kolli NK, Nirmala SV, Nuvvula S. The effectiveness of articaine and lidocaine single buccal infiltration versus conventional buccal and palatal injection using lidocaine during primary maxillary molar extraction: A randomized control trial. Anesth Essays Res 2017;11:160.

Sharma K, Sharma A, Aseri M, Batta A, Singh V, Pilania D, et al. Maxillary posterior teeth removal without palatal injection-truth or myth: A dilemma for oral surgeons. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8:ZC01-4.

Darawade DA, Kumar S, Budhiraja S, Mittal M, Mehta TN. A clinical study of efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride versus 2% lignocaine hydrochloride in dentistry. J Int Oral Health 2014;6:81-3.

OzeÃ§ I, Tasdemir U, GÃ¼mÃ¼s C, Solak O. Is it possible to anesthetize palatal tissues with buccal 4% articaine injection? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:1032-7.

Mittal M, Sharma S, Kumar A, Chopra R, Srivastava D. Comparison of anesthetic efficacy of articaine and lidocaine during primary maxillary molar extractions in children. Pediatr Dent 2015;37:520-4.

Badcock ME, McCullough MJ. Palatal anaesthesia for the removal of maxillary third molars as practised by oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Australia and New Zealand. Aust Dent J 2007;52:329-32.

Sekhar GR, Nagaraju T, Giri K, Nandagopal V, Sudheer R, Sravan. Is palatal injection mandatory prior to extraction of permanent maxillary tooth: A preliminary study. Indian J Dent Res 2011;22:100-2.

Yadav S, Verma A, Sachdeva A. Buccal injection of 2% lidocaine with epinephrine for the removal of maxillary third molars. Anesth Prog 2013;60:95-8.