Journal of The Korean Dental Society of Anesthesiology (대한치과마취과학회지)

The Korean Dental Society of Anesthsiology (대한치과마취과학회)
권호 표지

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

하치조신경 전달마취 시 4% 아티카인과 2% 리도카인의 임상적 효과에 관한 비교연구

  • Im, Tae-Yun (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Hwang, Kyung-Gyun (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Park, Chang-Joo (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Kim, Kwang-Soo (Division of Preventive Dentistry, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Oh, Young (Division of Conservative Dentistry, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Han, Ji-Young (Division of Periodontology, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Shim, Kwang-Sup (Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University)
  • 임태윤 (한양대학교 의과대학 치과학교실 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 황경균 (한양대학교 의과대학 치과학교실 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 박창주 (한양대학교 의과대학 치과학교실 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 김광수 (한양대학교 의과대학 치과학교실 예방치과) ;
  • 오영 (한양대학교 의과대학 치과학교실 치과보존과) ;
  • 한지영 (한양대학교 의과대학 치과학교실 치주과) ;
  • 심광섭 (한양대학교 의과대학 치과학교실 구강악안면외과)
  • Received : 2010.06.08
  • Accepted : 2010.06.20
  • Published : 2010.06.27
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

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

References

  1. 염광원: 치과영역에서의 새로운 Amide형 국소마취제–Articaine Hydrochloride. 대한치과마취과학회지 2003; 3: 80-3.
  2. 이원영, 서광석, 김현정, 염광원, 박창주: 하악 매복 제3대구치 발치 시 Articaine HCl과 Lidocaine HCl의 국소마취 효능에 대한 비교연구. 대한치과마취과학회지 2004; 1: 13-6.
  3. Certosimo AJ, Archer RD: A clinical evaluation of the electric pulp tester as an indicator of local anesthesia. Oper Dent 1996; 21: 25-30.
  4. Daublander M, Muller R, Lipp MD: The incidence of complications aswith local anesthesia in dentistry. Anesth Prog 1997; 44: 132-41.
  5. Donaldson D, James-Perdok L, Craig BJ, Derkson G, Richardson AS: A comparison of Ultracaine Ds (Articaine HCl) and citanest Forte (Prilocaine HCL) in maxillary infiltration and mandibular nerve block. J Can Dent Assoc 1987; 53: 38-42.
  6. Dudkiewicz A, Schwartz S, Laliberte R: Effectiveness of mandibular infiltration in children using the local anesthetic Ultracine (Articaine HCL). J Can Dent Assoc 1987; 53: 29-31.
  7. Haas DA, Harper DG, Saso MA, Young ER: Comparison of articaine and prilocaine anesthesia by infiltration in maxillary and mandibular arches. Anesth Prog 1990; 37: 230-7.
  8. Hass DA, Harper DG, Saso MA, Young ER: Lack of differential effect by Ultracine (Articaine) and Citanest (prilocaine) in infiltraton anesthesia. J Can Dent Assoc 1991; 57: 217-23.
  9. Haase A, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck M, Drum M: Comparing anesthetic efficacy of articaine versus lidoaine as a supplemental buccal infiltration of the mandibular first molar after an inferiror alveolar nerve block. J Am Dent Assoc 2008; 139: 1228-35. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0338
  10. Kanaa MD, Whitworth JM, Corbett IP, Meechan JG: Articaine and lidocaine mandibular buccal infiltration anesthesia: a prospective randomized double-blind cross-over study. J Endod 2006; 32: 296-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.09.016
  11. Lemay H, Albert G, Helie P, Dufour L, Gagnon P, Payant L, et al: Ultracaine in conventional operative dentistry. J Can Dent Assoc 1984; 50: 703-8.
  12. Lemmer B, Wiemers R: Circadian changes in stimulus thresholds and in the effect of a local anaesthetic drug in human teeth: studies with an electronic pulp tester. Chronobiol Int 1989; 6: 157-62. https://doi.org/10.3109/07420528909064626
  13. Malamed SF, Gagno S, Leblanc D: Efficacy of articaine: a new amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc 2000; 131: 635-42. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0237
  14. McDaniel KF, Rowe NH, Charbeneau GT: Tissue response to an electricpulp tester. J Prosthet Dent 1973; 29: 84-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(73)90144-3
  15. Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck FM: Anesthetic efficacy of different volumes of lidocaine with epinephrine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks. Gen Dent 2002; 50: 372-5.
  16. Potocnik I, Tomsic M, Sketelj J, Bajrovic FF: Articaine is more effective than lidocaine or mepivacaine in rat sensory nerve conduction block in vitro. J Dent Res 2006; 85: 162-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910608500209
  17. Rebolledo AS, Molina ED, Aytes LB, Escoda CG: Comparative study of the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lidoaine in inferior alveolar nerve block during surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2007; 12: 139-44.
  18. Robertson D, Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck M, McCartney M: The anesthetic efficacy of articaine in buccal infiltration of mandibular posterior teeth. J Am Dent Assoc 2007; 138: 1104-12. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2007.0324
  19. Tofoli GR, Ramacciato JC, de Oliveira PC, Volpato MC, Groppo FC: Comparison of effectivenessof 4% articaine associated with 1：100,000 or 1:200,000 epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve block. Anesth Prog 2003; 50: 164-8.
  20. Vahatalo K, Antila H, Lehitinen R: Articaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltration anesthesia. Anesth Prog 1993; 40: 114-6.
  21. Winter JE, Nathalang B:Effectiveness of a new local analgesic Hoe 40 0445. Scand J Dent Res 1972; 80: 272-8.