Open AccessAnesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine buccal infiltration in the urgency treatment of mandibular molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized clinical trial
Author(s) -
Marcelo Capitânio,
Izabela Volpato Marques Tookuni,
Nair Narumi Orita Pavan,
Isolde Terezinha Santos Previdelli,
Angélica Nascimento dos Santos,
Marcos Sérgio Endo
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
research, society and development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2525-3409
DOI - 10.33448/rsd-v10i5.14651
Subject(s) - articaine , mepivacaine , medicine , inferior alveolar nerve , anesthetic , visual analogue scale , dentistry , buccal administration , molar , anesthesia , randomized controlled trial , pulpitis , lidocaine , pulp (tooth) , surgery
The aim of this study was to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of the 4% articaine by the buccal infiltration technique (BI) after inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) with 2% mepivacaine, both with 1:100,000 epinephrine, in the urgency treatment of mandibular molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (SIP). This was a prospective study, with a randomized, blinded, controlled parallel clinical trial experimental design. Thirty patients diagnosed with SIP were randomly assigned, and the control group (G1) received the IANB with 1.8 mL of mepivacaine while the experimental group (G2) also received a supplemental BI with 1.8 mL of articaine. To evaluate the anesthetic efficacy, in addition to lip numbness test, the electric pulp testing (EPT) was used. Additionally, a visual analogue scale verified the presence of pain. Two-way ANOVA and Chi-square tests were applied at a significance level of 5%. There was a reduction in pain perception after the two techniques (p<0.001), with no difference between groups (p=0.479). The anesthetic efficacy was 26.6% for IANB (G1) and 40% for IANB plus BI (G2), without significant difference between the two treatments (p=0.699). The BI with 4% articaine after IANB with 2% mepivacaine, both with 1:100,000 epinephrine, did not significantly increase anesthetic success in patients with SIP.