Articaine Versus Lidocaine Concentration in the Palatal Tissues After Supraperiosteal Buccal Infiltration Anesthesia

Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of a single labial infiltration of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth without an additional lingual injection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective, randomized-controlled, split-mouth clinical study was implemented. Healthy adult patients seeking bilateral extraction of mandibular anterior teeth were included in this study. Teeth extractions were randomly assigned to two equal groups, where one mandibular anterior tooth was extracted using a solitary labial infiltration of either 4% articaine (the study group) or 2% lidocaine (the control group). After 14 days, the other mandibular anterior tooth was extracted using the other local anesthetic agent. The selection of the anesthetic agent injected in the first session was done in a randomized fashion. After 5 min of local anesthetic injection, the tooth was extracted, and each patient was asked to record the intensity of the extraction pain using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were included in the study. The efficacy of a single labial injection for mandibular anterior teeth extraction was established by the fact that none of the patients in the study or control group required re-administration of local anesthesia. The mean VAS for pain control during tooth extraction was 1.16 ± 0.93 for the articaine group and 1.71 ± 0.90 for the lidocaine group. The pain score showed a statistically significant decrease in the articaine group compared to that in the lidocaine group (P = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

Although the anesthetic effects of only buccal infiltration of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine for extraction of mandibular anterior teeth were comparable, the use of 4% articaine would have more effective and predictable outcomes.

CLINICALTRIALS

ORG: (ID: NCT05223075) 3/2/2022.

Improved Local Anesthesia at Inflamed Tissue Using the Association of Articaine and Copaiba Oil in Avocado Butter Nanostructured Lipid Carriers

Unsuccessful anesthesia often occurs under an inflammatory tissue environment, making dentistry treatment extremely painful and challenging. Articaine (ATC) is a local anesthetic used at high (4%) concentrations. Since nanopharmaceutical formulations may improve the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs, we encapsulated ATC in nanostructured lipid carriers (NLCs) aiming to increase the anesthetic effect on the inflamed tissue. Moreover, the lipid nanoparticles were prepared with natural lipids (copaiba (Copaifera langsdorffii) oil and avocado (Persia gratissima) butter) that added functional activity to the nanosystem. NLC-CO-A particles (~217 nm) showed an amorphous lipid core structure according to DSC and XDR. In an inflammatory pain model induced by λ-carrageenan in rats, NLC-CO-A improved (30%) the anesthetic efficacy and prolonged anesthesia (3 h) in relation to free ATC. In a PGE2-induced pain model, the natural lipid formulation significantly reduced (~20%) the mechanical pain when compared to synthetic lipid NLC. Opioid receptors were involved in the detected analgesia effect since their blockage resulted in pain restoration. The pharmacokinetic evaluation of the inflamed tissue showed that NLC-CO-A decreased tissue ATC elimination rate (ke) by half and doubled ATC’s half-life. These results present NLC-CO-A as an innovative system to break the impasse of anesthesia failure in inflamed tissue by preventing ATC accelerated systemic removal by the inflammatory process and improving anesthesia by its association with copaiba oil.

Efficacy of intraseptal anesthesia obtained by computer-controlled articaine with epinephrine delivery in scaling and root planing

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of the intraseptal anesthesia (ISA) obtained with three doses of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (4%Ar + Ep) for scaling and root planing (SRP), using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS). The secondary aims were to compare the clinical anesthetic parameters in relation to different jaw regions and examine the possible influence of sex and smoking habits on them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SRP under ISA obtained with different doses (0.1 ml, 0.2 ml, and 0.3 ml) of 4%Ar + Ep was performed in 360 patients. The success rate, onset, duration of soft tissue anesthesia, and the anesthetic field widths were recorded by pinprick testing.

RESULTS

The anesthesia success was high (90-95%). The onset was immediate. The duration and anesthetic field widths showed a dose-related significance, however, without a consistent sex-related or smoking-related significance. The multiple logistic regression analysis revealed a twofold higher chance of anesthesia success by increasing the dose and increased bleeding on probing-related and female sex-reduced probability of anesthesia success.

CONCLUSIONS

ISA obtained with 0.3 ml of 4%Ar + Ep delivered by a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system provided a high anesthetic success and the adequate clinical anesthetic parameters for SRP in all regions of both jaws.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

ISA obtained with 4%Ar + Ep provides an effective anesthesia for SRP. The anesthetic success rate may be reduced in the presence of gingival inflammation and in females as well. The study was registered in a Clinical Trials database (NCT04392804, registration date May 9, 2020).

Can 4% Articaine Buccal Infiltration Replace Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block (IANB) with 2% Xylocaine for Pulp Therapy in Primary Mandibular Molars? A Systematic Review

Aim and objective

This systematic review aims to compare the efficacy of 4% articaine buccal supraperiosteal/infiltration to that of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) with 2% xylocaine in providing pulpal anesthesia for carrying out pulp therapy of deciduous mandibular molars in children.

Materials and methods

PubMed, Cochrane Registry, and Ovid SP were searched in the timeframe between years 1991 and 2020 with appropriate MeSH terms. Full texts were selected only after a preliminary screening of relevant titles and abstracts.

Results

Five studies were involved for the final qualitative analysis. The parameter sought for was "Pain during pulp therapy after injection with buccal supraperiosteal/infiltration (4% articaine) or IANB (2% lignocaine) in primary mandibular molars. Three studies evaluated objective pain (operator reported) during pulp therapy, reported significantly lower pain scores with articaine buccal infiltration (BI). Among the two studies that evaluated subjective pain, one study reported a significantly lower pain score with the articaine BI group. The other study reported no difference statistically between both groups.

Conclusion

Under the bounds of this systematic review, BI with 4% articaine might be equivalent to IANB with 2% lignocaine for providing pulpal anesthesia required for pulp therapy procedures in primary mandibular molars; however, the quality of evidence is low, more number of well-controlled studies with adequate sized sample should be conducted out to verify the same.

How to cite this article

Tirupathi SP, Rajasekhar S, Ganesh M, et al. Can 4% Articaine Buccal Infiltration Replace Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block (IANB) with 2% Xylocaine for Pulp Therapy in Primary Mandibular Molars? A Systematic Review. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(3):420-425.

Articaine in functional NLC show improved anesthesia and anti-inflammatory activity in zebrafish

Anesthetic failure is common in dental inflammation processes, even when modern agents, such as articaine, are used. Nanostructured lipid carriers (NLC) are systems with the potential to improve anesthetic efficacy, in which active excipients can provide desirable properties, such as anti-inflammatory. Coupling factorial design (FD) for in vitro formulation development with in vivo zebrafish tests, six different NLC formulations, composed of synthetic (cetyl palmitate/triglycerides) or natural (avocado butter/olive oil/copaiba oil) lipids were evaluated for loading articaine. The formulations selected by FD were physicochemically characterized, tested for shelf stability and in vitro release kinetics and had their in vivo effect (anti-inflammatory and anesthetic effect) screened in zebrafish. The optimized NLC formulation composed of avocado butter, copaiba oil, Tween 80 and 2% articaine showed adequate physicochemical properties (size = 217.7 ± 0.8 nm, PDI = 0.174 ± 0.004, zeta potential = - 40.2 ± 1.1 mV, %EE = 70.6 ± 1.8) and exhibited anti-inflammatory activity. The anesthetic effect on touch reaction and heart rate of zebrafish was improved to 100 and 60%, respectively, in comparison to free articaine. The combined FD/zebrafish approach was very effective to reveal the best articaine-in-NLC formulation, aiming the control of pain at inflamed tissues.

Comparison of the buccal injection versus buccal and palatal injection for extraction of permanent maxillary posterior teeth using 4% articaine: a split mouth study

In spite of the development of modern injection techniques, palatal injection is still a painful experience for patients. A plethora of techniques has been tested to reduce this. One such technique that has been claimed to work is administering articaine on the buccal side alone for the extraction of maxillary teeth due to its ability to diffuse through soft and hard tissues more reliably than other local anaesthetics. This split mouth study evaluated the efficacy of 4% articaine with 1:100000 adrenaline to avoid the painful palatal injection for bilateral permanent maxillary tooth extraction in 50 patients. The 100mm 10 point Visual Analog Scale/Wong Baker Facial Pain Scale was used to rate the amount of pain felt on injection, on probing the tissues prior to, or during, extraction, and one hour postoperatively. Although the buccal injection alone resulted in lower pain while injecting the anaesthetic, it did not result in the absence of pain before tooth extraction as has been suggested by various studies. A total of 74% patients required a palatal injection on the study side. We conclude that in most cases, when using a buccal injection alone, one cannot rely on the diffusion of articaine for effective palatal anaesthesia. Despite this, we suggest that as an initial option in young patients, the operator can consider avoiding the painful palatal injection by the use of articaine to prevent aversion to dental treatment. Postoperatively, the difference in pain levels was not statistically significant and no patient showed signs of lesions at the injection sites.

Is Articaine More Potent than Mepivacaine for Use in Oral Surgery?

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the potency and speed of action of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine for maxillary teeth extractions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ninety-four patients, aged between 16 to 70 years old, were recruited in this study. Two regimens were randomly administered over one visit. Patients of treatment group 1 received mepivacaine 2% with 1:100,000 adrenaline, whereas treatment group 2 - articaine 4% with 1:100,000 adrenaline. The onset time of pulp anaesthesia for maxillary teeth indicated for extraction was determined by electronic pulp testing. At any point of trial (10 minutes), the anesthetized tooth becomes unresponsive for maximal pulp stimulation (64 reading), the extraction was carried out.

RESULTS

In this study, 85 patients had successful local anaesthetic followed by extraction within the study duration time (10 min). However, 5 patients had failed dental extraction (4 in mepivacaine group and 1 in articaine group). Patients in the articaine buccal infiltration group recorded faster onset time of action regarding anaesthesia and teeth extraction than patients in mepivacaine buccal infiltration group (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Articaine is an effective anaesthetic with a rapid onset, comparable to mepivacaine in infiltrative techniques used for maxillary teeth extraction. However, articaine has clinically achieved faster dental anaesthesia and earlier teeth extraction than mepivacaine. So, articaine can be the local anaesthetic of first choice in oral surgery.