The Efficacy of Articaine Single Buccal Injection for Maxillary Premolars Extraction: A Randomized Clinical Study

Al-Mmustafa Qays Al-Humairi; Hassanien Ahmed Al-Jumaily

doi:10.54133/ajms.v5i.241

المؤلفون

Al-Mmustafa Qays Al-Humairi Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, University of Baghdad, Iraq. https://orcid.org/0009-0008-8263-6470
Hassanien Ahmed Al-Jumaily Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, University of Baghdad, Iraq.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54133/ajms.v5i.241

الكلمات المفتاحية:

Articaine، Bicuspid، Extraction، Lidocaine، Palatial injection

الملخص

Background: The palatal injection is the most frequently used painful injection, but there is evidence that articaine 4% administered through buccal injection alone can extract maxillary teeth painlessly. Objective: A comparative study is conducted to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of articaine 4% buccal without palatal injection for extraction of maxillary premolars compared to lidocaine 2% buccal and palatal injection. Methods: A randomized, single-blinded clinical trial was carried out involving 200 patients, of whom 104 were females and 96 were males, who were indicated for extraction of maxillary premolar teeth. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group A, control group: The maxillary premolar tooth extraction was performed under buccal and palatal infiltration anesthesia with 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine. Group B, a study group, extracted the maxillary premolar’s teeth under buccal anesthesia without palatal infiltration anesthesia with articaine hydrochloride 1.8 mL, 4% with 1:100,000 epinephrine. The outcome variable was the pain experienced during the extraction using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Results: Statistical analysis showed that the difference in pain perception during extraction by VAS scores was statistically non-significant between the control and the study groups. Conclusions: The painful palatal injection in the extraction of maxillary premolars can be overcome by using only a buccal injection of articaine 4%.

التنزيلات

بيانات التنزيل غير متوفرة بعد.

المراجع

Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. Efficacy of articaine: A new amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000;131(5):635-642. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0237.

Chandrasekaran D, Chinnaswami R, Shanthi K, Dhiravia Sargunam A, Kumar K, Satheesh T. A Prospective study to assess the efficacy of 4% articaine, 0.5% bupivacaine and 2% lignocaine using a single buccal supraperiosteal injection for maxillary tooth extraction. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2021;13(Suppl. 1):S721-S724. doi: 10.4103%2Fjpbs.JPBS_659_20.

Azad AK, George AM, Mustafa MNT, Jamin NHM, Haron A, Mayya SS, et al. Efficacy of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine without palatal injection in assessing pain during maxillary teeth extraction: A randomized clinical trial. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 2019;13(12):ZC05-ZC08. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2019/42621.13337.

Sharma K. Maxillary posterior teeth removal without palatal injection –Truth or myth: A dilemma for oral surgeons. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 2014;8(11):1–5. doi: 10.7860%2FJCDR%2F2014%2F10378.5092.

Fan S, Liang CW, Hui YZ, Quan HZ. 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 Endodontol. 2009;107(3):359-363. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.08.025.

Gazal G. Is articaine more potent than mepivacaine for use in oral surgery? J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2018;9(3):1-8. doi: 10.5037%2fjomr.2018.9305.

Sharkh MA, Khalil A, Ong-Ly C, Wilson T, Galil K. Buccal injection of articaine to anesthetize the palatal mucosa. Gen Dent. 2019;67(3):26-30. PMID: 31199741.

Santhosh Kumar MP. Newer delivery systems for local anesthesia in dentistry. J Pharm Sci Res. 2015;7(5):252-255.

Majid OW, Ahmed AM. 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. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;76(4):737-743. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2017.11.028.

Sochenda S, Vorakulpipat C, Kumar KC, Saengsirinavin C, Rojvanakarn M, Wongsirichat N. Buccal infiltration injection without a 4% articaine palatal injection for maxillary impacted third molar surgery. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;46(4):250-257. doi: 10.5125%2Fjkaoms.2020.46.4.250.

Meechan JG. Effective topical anesthetic agents and techniques. Dent Clin North Am. 2002;46(4):759-766. doi: 10.1016/s0011-8532(02)00035-6.

Uckan S, Dayangac E, Araz K. Is permanent maxillary tooth removal without palatal injection possible? Oral Surg, Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol. 2006;102(6):733-735. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.12.005.

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(5):81-83. PMID: 25395799.

Somuri AV, Rai AB, Pillai M. Extraction of permanent maxillary teeth by only buccal infiltration of articaine. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2013;12(2):130-132. doi: 10.1007/s12663-012-0396-0.

Bansal S, Kaura S, Sangha P, Kaur P, Bahl R, Bansal S. Comparison of anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lignocaine. Indian J Dent Sci. 2018;10(2):92. doi: 10.4103/IJDS.IJDS_126_17.

Luqman U, Janjua OSM, Ashfaq M, Irfan H, Mushtaq S, Bilal A. Comparison of articaine and lignocaine for uncomplicated maxillary exodontia. J Coll Physic Surg Pakistan. 2015;25(3):181-184. PMID: 25772957.

Kanaa MD, Whitworth JM, Meechan JG. A comparison of the efficacy of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and 2% lidocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine in achieving pulpal anesthesia in maxillary teeth with irreversible pulpitis. J Endod. 2012;38(3):279-282. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.11.010.

Sreekumar K, Bhargava D. Comparison of onset and duration of action of soft tissue and pulpal anesthesia with three volumes of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in maxillary infiltration anesthesia. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;15(4):195-199. doi: 10.1007/s10006-011-0275-8.

Rathi NV, Khatri AA, Agrawal AG, Sudhindra Baliga M, Thosar NR, Deolia SG. Anesthetic efficacy of buccal infiltration articaine versus lidocaine for extraction of primary molar teeth. Anesth Prog. 2019;66(1):3-7. doi: 10.2344/anpr-65-04-02.

Özeç I, Taşdemir U, Gümüş C, Solak O. Is it possible to anesthetize palatal tissues with buccal 4% articaine injection? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(5):1032-1037. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2009.12.023.

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(7):520-524. PMID: 26883609.

Sharma S, Majumder K, Rao JKD, Arya V, Siwach V, Gulia S. Assessment of relationship between pain and anxiety following dental extraction—A prospective study. Pain Stud Treat. 2015;03(03):23-30. doi: 10.4236/pst.2015.33003.

Bataineh AB, Nusair YM, Al-Rahahleh RQ. Comparative study of articaine and lidocaine without palatal injection for maxillary teeth extraction. Clin Oral Investig. 2019;23(8):3239-3248. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2738-x.

Hassan S, Sripathi Rao B, Sequeria J, Rai G. Efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride and 2% lignocaine hydrochloride in the extraction of maxillary premolars for orthodontic reasons. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2011;1(1):14. doi: 10.4103%2F2231-0746.83145.

Jaiswal P, Goyal R, Dubey C, Akther J, Ramalingam K, Kalita S. A split-mouth clinical comparative evaluation of the anesthetic efficacy of articaine and lignocaine for maxillary bicuspids extraction. Cureus. 2023;15(6):e40167. doi: 10.7759/cureus.40167.