Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2020.20.4.213

Comparison of lidocaine with articaine buccal injection in reducing complications following impacted mandibular third molar surgery: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial  

Naghipour, Amin (Student Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Semnan University of Medical Sciences)
Esmaeelinejad, Mohammad (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Semnan University of Medical Sciences)
Dehnad, Seyed Vahid (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Semnan University of Medical Sciences)
Shahi, Anahita (Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Semnan University of Medical Sciences)
Jarrahi, Alireza (Student Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Semnan University of Medical Sciences)
Publication Information
Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine / v.20, no.4, 2020 , pp. 213-221 More about this Journal
Abstract
Background: Complications following impacted third molar surgery significantly affect patients' quality of life during the immediate postoperative period. This study aimed to achieve the proper anesthesia method by comparing the effect of the application of lidocaine alone with the application of lidocaine and articaine simultaneously in reducing the complications during and following impacted mandibular third molar surgery. Methods: The study design was a split-mouth double-blind randomized clinical trial. The study was conducted on 13 patients (26 samples) referred for elective surgical removal of bilateral impacted mandibular third molar with similar difficulty on both sides. Each patient underwent similar surgical procedures on two separate appointments. Each patient randomly received 2% lidocaine for conventional inferior alveolar nerve block and 4% articaine for local infiltration before the surgery on one side (group A) and 2% lidocaine alone (for both block anesthesia and infiltration) before the surgery on the other side (group B). Intraoperative and postoperative variables for both groups were established and statistically analyzed. Results: The findings showed that pain on the first day after surgery in group A was significantly lower than that in group B. The patients in group A mentioned experiencing less discomfort following the surgery. The increased horizontal swelling on the first and third days following surgery and oblique swelling on the seventh day in patients in group B were statistically significant. Conclusion: Choosing an appropriate anesthetic drug for oral surgery, specifically impacted third molar surgery, is dependent on the clinician's opinion, however; it seems that the combination of lidocaine and articaine may control the patient's pain significantly better than lidocaine alone.
Keywords
Lidocaine; Local Anesthesia; Pain; Third Molar;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 de Souza AM, Horliana AC, Simone JL, Jorge WA, Tortamano IP. Postoperative pain after bupivacaine supplementation in mandibular third molar surgery: splint-mouth randomized double blind controlled clinical trial. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 18: 387-91.   DOI
2 Mittal J, Kaur G, Mann HS, Narang S, Kamra M, Kapoor S, et al. Comparative study of the efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in surgical removal of bilaterally impacted mandibular third molars. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018; 19: 743-8.   DOI
3 Alling CC 3rd, Catone GA. Management of impacted teeth. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1993; 51: 3-6.   DOI
4 Yuasa H, Kawai T, Sugiura M. Classification of surgical difficulty in extracting impacted third molars. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002; 40: 26-31.   DOI
5 Gay-Escoda C, Gomez-Santos L, Sanchez-Torres A, Herraez-Vilas JM. Effect of the suture technique on postoperative pain, swelling and trismus after removal of lower third molars: a randomized clinical trial. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2015; 20: e372-7.
6 Miloro M, Ghali GE, Larsen PE, Waite P. Peterson's principles of oral and maxillofacial surgery. vol. 1. Hamilton: BC Decker Inc. 2004.
7 Haraji A, Lasemi E, Zareh R, Nateghi Z. Comparison of naproxen-azithromycin combination with piroxicamazithromycin combination in prevention of complications after impacted third molar extraction. J Mashad Dent Sch 2009; 33: 207-14.
8 Hasheminia D, Moaddabi A, Moradi S, Soltani P, Moannaei M, Issazadeh M. The efficacy of 1% betadine mouthwash on the incidence of dry socket after mandibular third molar surgery. J Clin Exp Dent 2018; 10: e445-9.
9 Alcantara CE, Falci SG, Oliveira-Ferreira F, Santos CR, Pinheiro ML. Pre-emptive effect of dexamethasone and methylprednisolone on pain, swelling, and trismus after third molar surgery: a split-mouth randomized triple-blind clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 43: 93-8.   DOI
10 Sierra Rebolledo A, Delgado Molina E, Berini Aytes L, Gay Escoda C. Comparative study of the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine in inferior alveolar nerve block during surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2007; 12: 139-44.
11 Katyal V. The efficacy and safety of articaine versus lignocaine in dental treatments: a meta-analysis. J Dent 2010; 38: 307-17.   DOI
12 Sharifi M, Karimaghaee A, Iranmanesh F, Sheikhfathalahi M. Comparison of the anesthetic efficacy of articaine infiltration versus lidocaine inferior alveolar nerve block in pulp therapy of lower primary molars. J Mash Dent Sch 2017; 41: 305-16.
13 Esparza-Villalpando V, Chavarria-Bolanos D, Gordillo- Moscoso A, Masuoka-Ito D, Martinez-Rider R, Isiordia-Espinoza M, et al. Comparison of the analgesic efficacy of preoperative/postoperative oral dexketoprofen trometamol in third molar surgery: a randomized clinical trial. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2016; 44: 1350-5.   DOI
14 Lim D, Ngeow WC. A comparative study on the efficacy of submucosal injection of dexamethasone versus methylprednisolone in reducing postoperative sequelae after third molar surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017; 75: 2278-86.   DOI
15 Saxena P, Gupta SK, Newaskar V, Chandra A. Advances in dental local anesthesia techniques and devices: an update. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2013; 4: 19-24.   DOI
16 Ogle OE, Mahjoubi G. Local anesthesia: agents, techniques, and complications. Dent Clin North Am 2012; 56: 133-48.   DOI
17 Nizharadze N, Mamaladze M, Chipashvili N, Vadachkoria D. Articaine-the best choice of local anesthetic in contemporary dentistry. Georgian Medical News 2011: 15-23.
18 El-Kholey KE. Infiltration anesthesia for extraction of the mandibular molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013; 71: 1658.e1-5.   DOI
19 Mikesell P, Nusstein J, Reader A, Beck M, Weaver J. A comparison of articaine and lidocaine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks. J Endod 2005; 31: 265-70.   DOI
20 Ashraf H, Kazem M, Dianat O, Noghrehkar F. Efficacy of articaine versus lidocaine in block and infiltration anesthesia administered in teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. J Endod 2013; 39: 6-10.   DOI
21 Colombini BL, Modena KC, Calvo AM, Sakai VT, Giglio FP, Dionisio TJ, et al. Articaine and mepivacaine efficacy in postoperative analgesia for lower third molar removal: a double-blind, randomized, crossover study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 102: 169-74.   DOI
22 Lima-Junior JL, Dias-Ribeiro E, de Araujo TN, Ferreira-Rocha J, Honfi-Junior ES, Sarmento CF, et al. Evaluation of the buccal vestibule-palatal diffusion of 4% articaine hydrochloride in impacted maxillary third molar extractions. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2009; 14: E129-32.
23 Mehra P, Reebye U, Nadershah M, Cottrell D. Efficacy of anti-inflammatory drugs in third molar surgery: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013; 42: 835-42.   DOI