Hussam Omer Ahmed Mohamed Elamin* and El-Neel Ahmed Mohamed Ali

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Khartoum, Sudan

*Corresponding Author: Hussam Omer Ahmed Mohamed Elamin, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Khartoum, Sudan.

Received: September 09, 2021; Published: September 25, 2021

Abstract

Background: 4% Articaine is a local anaesthetic agent that has a more superior anaesthetic effect compared to lidocaine.

Study design: A quasi experimental study.

Setting: Khartoum teaching dental hospital (KTDH).

Objective: To evaluate the efficiency of articaine as a local anesthetic agent when extracting maxillary teeth using buccal infiltration only compared to Lidocaine buccal and palatal infiltration.

Methods: Patients with maxillary bilateral extraction were injected using a Dental syringe with a short needle (infiltration) on one side with lidocaine 2% buccally and palatally (control) and on another appointment the other side was injected with 4% articaine on the buccal side only (infiltration) using a Dental syringe with a short needle. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to assess the pain on each side before and during the extraction. Data were recorded and inserted in SPSS for statistical analysis comparing between the VAS scores between the control and articaine injected sites by means of t- test and chi square.

Results: A total of 79 patients, 74 patients (93.7%) of the patients reported no pain sensation “0” with both Articaine and Lidocaine. Moreover, 5 patients (6.3%) of those whom received Articaine reported varying degrees of pain such as: “2”, “4” and “5” were each recorded by 1.3% (n = 1) participants while “3” was recorded by 2.5% (n = 2). On the other hand, with lidocaine also 6.3% (n = 5) had varying recordings on the VAS “1” and “4” were reported by 1.3% each as for “2” it was reported by 3.7% ( n = 3). As for the comparison between VAS scores for Lidocaine and Articaine there was no statistical significance between the pain scale scores of Articaine and lidocaine (chi square p = 1, paired sample t test p = 0.535).

Conclusion: 4% articaine administrated by means of buccal infiltration only was as efficient as using 2% lidocaine when administrated by means of conventional infiltration both buccally and palatally.

Keywords: Articaine, Lidocaine, Extraction, Maxillary, Buccal, Palatal

References

1. Nilesh B. “Guide to pain Management in Low-Resource Settings”. International Association for the Study of Pain (2010).
2. Rosenberg ES. “A computer controlled anaesthetic delivery system in periodontal practice: patient satisfaction and acceptance”. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 14 (2002): 39-41.
3. Robinson PD., et al. “Local anaesthesia in dentistry”. London: Read Educational and Professional Publishing (2002).
4. Niemann A. “About a new organic base in the coca leaves”. Archiv der Pharmazie 153 (1860): 129-155.
5. Rahn R and Ball B. “Local anaesthesia in dentistry - Articaine and Epinephrine for dental anaesthesia”. 1st ed. Seefeld, Germany: 3M ESPE AG (2001).
6. Malamed SF., et al. “Articaine Hydrochloride: a study of the safety of a new amide local anaesthetic”. Journal of the American Dental Association 2 (2001): 177-185.
7. Malamed SF. “Handbook of local anaesthesia”. 5th ed. St. Louis, Mosby (2004).
8. Fox AJ and Rowbotham DJ. “Anaesthesia”. BMJ7209 (1999): 557-60.
9. Tirbod F. “Surgical applied anatomy of the maxillary region”. Atlas of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery Clinic 15 (2007): 1-6.
10. Sekhar GR., et al. “Is palatal injection mandatory prior to extraction of maxillary tooth: a preliminary study”. Indian Journal of Dental Research1 (2011): 100-102.
11. Yadav S., et al. “Buccal injection of 2% lidocaine with epinephrine for the removal of maxillary 3rd molars”. Anaesthesia Progress3 (2013): 95-98.
12. Lugman U., et al. “Comparison of articaine and lignocaine for uncomplicated exodontia”. Journal of College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan 3 (2015): 181-184.
13. Lima JL., et al. “Comparison of buccal infiltration only of 4% articaine 1:100000 and 1:200000 epinephrine for extraction of maxillary third molars with pericoronitis: a pilot study”. Anaesthesia Progress2 (2013): 42-45.
14. Fan S., et al. “Comparison of the efficiency of permanent maxillary tooth removal performed with single buccal infiltration versus the routine buccal and palatal injection”. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology3 (2009): 359-363.
15. Lessemi E., et al. “Anaesthetic efficacy of a labial infiltration method on the nasopalatine nerve”. British Dental Journal10 (2008): E21.
16. Dattatrya AD., et al. “A Clinical Study of Efficacy of 4% Articaine Hydrochloride Versus 2% Lignocaine Hydrochloride in dentistry”. International Oral Health5 (2014): 81-83.
17. Kapol S., et al. “Maxillary posterior removal without palatal injection - Truth or Myth: A dilemma for oral surgeons”. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research11 (2014): ZC01-ZC04.
18. Omer W and Aws M. “The Anesthetic Efficacy of Articaine and Lidocaine in Equivalent Doses as Buccal and Non-Palatal Infiltration for Maxillary Molar Extraction: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial”. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery4 (2018): 737-743.
19. Srinivasan N., et al. “Comparison of anesthetic efficiency of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine for maxillary buccal infiltration in patients with irreversible pulpitis”. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology1 (2009): 133136.
20. Evans G., et al. “A prospective, randomized, Double blind Comparison of Articaine and Lidocaine for Maxillary Infiltration”. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology4 (2008): 389-393.
21. Kanaa MD., et al. “A comparison of the Efficiency of 4% Articaine 1: 100,000 epinephrine and 2% Lidocaine 1: 80,000 epinephrine in Achieving Pulpal Anesthesia in Maxillary Teeth with Irreversible Pulpitis”. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology3 (2012): 279-282.
22. , et al. “Onset and duration periods of articaine and lidocaine on maxillary infiltration”. Quintessence International 36.3 (2005): 197-201.
23. Kanaa MD., et al. “Articaine and Lidocaine Mandibular Buccal Infiltration Anesthesia: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Cross-Over Study”. Journal of Endodontics4 (2006): 296-298.
24. Oliveira PC., et al. “Articaine and lignocaine efficiency in infiltration anesthesia: a pilot study”. British Dental Journal 197 (2004): 45-46.
25. David Machine., et al. Sample Size Tables for Clinical Studies. Third edition (2008).
26. Anwar B., et al. “Comparative study of articaine and lidocaine without palatal injection for maxillary teeth extraction”. Clinical Oral Investigation8 (2019): 3239-3248.
27. Mathew H and Peter P. “Articaine: A review of the literature”. British Dental Journal 210 (2011): 323-329.
28. Ortel R., et al. “Saturable in vitro metabolism of articsine by serum estarses: does it contribute to the persistence of local anesthetic effect?” Reg Anesthesia 21 (1996): 576581.
29. Tucker G T. “Plasma binding and disposition of local anesthetics”. International Anesthesiology Clinics 13 (1975): 33-59.
30. Vandana Katyal. “The efficacy and safety of articaine versus lignocaine in dental treatments: A meta-analysis”. Journal of Dentistry 4 (2010): 307-317.
31. Daya S., et al. “Effectivness of articaine, single buccal infiltration versus Lidocaine conventional buccal and palatal infiltration in maxillary local anesthesia: A comparative clinical study”. Indian Journal of Contemporary Dentistry 1 (2019): 47-51.
32. D Prasana Kumar., et al. “Anesthetic efficacy of Single buccal infiltration of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine in extraction of maxillary first Molar”. Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery 2 (2019): 239-246.
33. Haytham Al-mahalawy., et al. “Articaine Versus Lidocaine Concentration in the Palatal Tissues After Supraperiosteal Buccal Infiltration Anesthesia”. Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery2 (2018): 315.e1-315.e7.

Citation

Citation: Hussam Omer Ahmed Mohamed Elamin and El-Neel Ahmed Mohamed Ali. “Extraction of Maxillary Teeth Using 4% Articaine with Buccal Infiltration Only in Comparison with 2% Lidocaine Buccal and Palatal Infiltration". Acta Scientific Nutritional Health 5.10 (2021): 84-90.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2021 Hussam Omer Ahmed Mohamed Elamin and El-Neel Ahmed Mohamed Ali. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.