Journal List > J Korean Dent Soc Anesthesiol > v.4(1) > 1084415

TOOLS
Lee, Park, Seo, Kim, and Yum: Comparative Study for the Anesthetic Efficacy between Articaine HCl and Lidocaine HCl during the Surgical Extraction of Bilateral Mandibular Impacted Third Molars
Original Article

Journal of the Korean Dental Society of Anesthesiology 2004; 4(1): 13-16.

Published online: 1 June 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17245/jkdsa.2004.4.1.13

Comparative Study for the Anesthetic Efficacy between Articaine HCl and Lidocaine HCl during the Surgical Extraction of Bilateral Mandibular Impacted Third Molars

Won-Young Lee, Chang-Joo Park, Kwang-Suk Seo, Hyun-Jeong Kim, Kwang-Won Yum

Department of Dental Anesthesiology, Seoul National University College of Dentistry, Seoul, Korea.

Corresponding Author: (chang40@snu.ac.kr)

Copyright © 2004 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, a new amide-type local anesthetic, was recently commercially available in Korea. The purpose of this study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy between articaine HCl and lidocaine HCl for the surgical extraction of bilateral mandibular impacted third molars.

Patients and Methods

Forty young and healthy patients with bilateral impacted third molars were selected with permission. Randomly, one side of impacted third molar was operated under local anesthesia using 4% articaine and the other side under 2% lidocaine after 1 or 2 week recovery time. Intraoperative pain was evaluated via 0-10 cm visual analog scale (VAS) by both the patient and operator immediately after the operation. After 1 day and 7 days, the complications of local anesthesia were checked.

Results

The pain VAS scores in articaine group, evaluated by both the patient and operator, were lower than those in lidocaine group, but they were not statistically significant (P = 0.44 and 0.54, respectively). The incidence of complications of local anesthesia between articaine and lidocaine was similar.

Conclusions

In this study, articaine showed at least equal efficacy compared to lidocaine. The further dose-controlled study with more pharmacokinetic parameters will be needed.

Keywords: Carticaine, Lidocaine, Local anesthesia, Oral surgery, Treatment efficacy

TOOLS
Similar articles