Journal List > J Korean Dent Soc Anesthesiol > v.10(1) > 1084269

TOOLS
Im, Hwang, Park, Kim, Oh, Han, and Shim: Randomized, Double-blind, Comparative Clinical Trial on the Efficacy of 4% Articaine and 2% Lidocaine in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Anesthesia
Original Article

Journal of the Korean Dental Society of Anesthesiology 2010; 10(1): 1-6.

Published online: 30 May 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17245/jkdsa.2010.10.1.1

Randomized, Double-blind, Comparative Clinical Trial on the Efficacy of 4% Articaine and 2% Lidocaine in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Anesthesia

Tae-Yun Im, D.D.S., Kyung-Gyun Hwang, D.D.S., Ph.D., Chang-Joo Park, D.D.S., Ph.D., Kwang-Soo Kim, D.D.S., Ph.D.*, Young Oh, D.D.S.†, Ji-Young Han, D.D.S., Ph.D.‡, Kwang-Sup Shim, D.D.S, Ph.D.

Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea.

*Division of Preventive Dentistry, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea.

†Division of Conservative Dentistry, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea.

‡Division of Periodontology, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea.

Corresponding Author: (fastchang@hanyang.ac.kr)

Received 8 June 2010       Revised 20 June 2010       Accepted 20 June 2010

Copyright © 2010 Journal of the Korean Dental Society of Anesthesiology

(open-access, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/):

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background

Articaine, commercially available in South Korea from 2004, is widely being used for dental treatments. In the surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars, one of the most common procedures in oral and maxillofacial surgery, the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine, both with 1:100,000 epinephrine, was compared.

Methods

A randomized double-blind clinical trial was conducted of 80 patients for bilateral surgical extraction of mandibular third molars with informed consents. One operator carried out the routine surgical procedures using local anesthetic 4% articaine or 2% lidocaine with the same concentration of vasoconstrictor. Latency, duration of anesthesia and the amount of anesthetic solution were recorded. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the intraoperative pain.

Results

The pain VAS scores reported similar anesthetic effect with both local anesthetics. Not in the latency of anesthesia and the amount of anesthetic solution, statistically significant difference was found in the mean duration of anesthesia.

Conclusions

It was concluded that 4% articaine could offer better or at least the same clinical feasibility compared to 2% lidocaine, particularly in terms of the duration of the local anesthesia for common dental treatments.

Keywords: Anesthesia, Local, Articaine, Lidocaine, Molar, Third, Surgery, Oral

TOOLS
Similar articles