Efficacy for Lidocaine and Articaine in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block - A Comparative Study.

Q3 Dentistry
Indian Journal of Dental Research Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-20 DOI:10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_678_23
Rakhi S Purkayastha, Samir Joshi, Krishnanunni Nair, Sudhir Pawar
{"title":"Efficacy for Lidocaine and Articaine in Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block - A Comparative Study.","authors":"Rakhi S Purkayastha, Samir Joshi, Krishnanunni Nair, Sudhir Pawar","doi":"10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_678_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Compare the efficacy of 2% lidocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000) and 4% articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000) in inferior alveolar nerve block prior to extraction of bilateral teeth posterior to canine in interval of one week.</p><p><strong>Methods and material: </strong>Thirty-five patients were selected for the study. Patients were divided into two different groups: Group 1 - (2% lignocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000)) and Group 2 - (4% articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000)) solution. The study variables for each anaesthetic agent were: onset of action and depth of anaesthesia. A pulp tester was used to demonstrate quantitative values and a visual analogue scale (VAS) was used for qualitative evaluation of the two anaesthetic drugs in 2 min cycle for 10 min with respect to test canine. Anaesthesia was considered successful when pulp tester value 64 was achieved in 10 min for both the anaesthetic agent.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>The difference in the efficacy of lignocaine and articaine was analysed using Student's t test. Within group comparison of the response to the pulp vitality test and VAS over various time periods was analysed using repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with post-hoc Bonferroni test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data analysis showed statistical differences in onset and depth of anaesthesia between the two groups (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>4% Articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000) onset of action is faster and depth of anaesthesia is better compared to 2% lignocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000). Many previous studies reported onset of anaesthesia, but this study evaluates onset and depth of both the anaesthetic agent quantitatively and qualitatively.</p>","PeriodicalId":13311,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Dental Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Dental Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_678_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Compare the efficacy of 2% lidocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000) and 4% articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000) in inferior alveolar nerve block prior to extraction of bilateral teeth posterior to canine in interval of one week.

Methods and material: Thirty-five patients were selected for the study. Patients were divided into two different groups: Group 1 - (2% lignocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000)) and Group 2 - (4% articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000)) solution. The study variables for each anaesthetic agent were: onset of action and depth of anaesthesia. A pulp tester was used to demonstrate quantitative values and a visual analogue scale (VAS) was used for qualitative evaluation of the two anaesthetic drugs in 2 min cycle for 10 min with respect to test canine. Anaesthesia was considered successful when pulp tester value 64 was achieved in 10 min for both the anaesthetic agent.

Statistical analysis used: The difference in the efficacy of lignocaine and articaine was analysed using Student's t test. Within group comparison of the response to the pulp vitality test and VAS over various time periods was analysed using repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with post-hoc Bonferroni test.

Results: Data analysis showed statistical differences in onset and depth of anaesthesia between the two groups (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: 4% Articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000) onset of action is faster and depth of anaesthesia is better compared to 2% lignocaine with adrenaline (1:200,000). Many previous studies reported onset of anaesthesia, but this study evaluates onset and depth of both the anaesthetic agent quantitatively and qualitatively.

利多卡因和阿替卡因在下牙槽神经阻滞中的疗效对比研究
目的:比较 2% 利多卡因加肾上腺素(1:200,000)和 4% 阿替卡因加肾上腺素(1:100,000)在拔除双侧犬齿后部牙齿前进行下牙槽神经阻滞的疗效,时间间隔为一周:研究选择了 35 名患者。患者被分为两组:第 1 组--(2% 阿替卡因加肾上腺素(1:200,000))和第 2 组--(4% 阿替卡因加肾上腺素(1:100,000))溶液。每种麻醉剂的研究变量为:起效时间和麻醉深度。使用牙髓测试仪显示定量值,并使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)对两种麻醉药物进行定性评估,周期为 2 分钟,时间为 10 分钟。当两种麻醉剂在 10 分钟内达到纸浆测试值 64 时,即认为麻醉成功:使用学生 t 检验分析木质素和阿替卡因疗效的差异。使用重复测量方差分析(ANOVA)和事后 Bonferroni 检验分析不同时间段内牙髓活力测试和 VAS 反应的组内比较:数据分析显示,两组在麻醉开始时间和麻醉深度上存在统计学差异(P < 0.05):4%阿替卡因加肾上腺素(1:100,000)与2%木质素加肾上腺素(1:200,000)相比,起效更快,麻醉深度更好。以前的许多研究都报告了麻醉剂的起效时间,但本研究对两种麻醉剂的起效时间和麻醉深度都进行了定量和定性评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Indian Journal of Dental Research
Indian Journal of Dental Research Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
审稿时长
38 weeks
期刊介绍: Indian Journal of Dental Research (IJDR) is the official publication of the Indian Society for Dental Research (ISDR), India section of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR), published quarterly. IJDR publishes scientific papers on well designed and controlled original research involving orodental sciences. Papers may also include reports on unusual and interesting case presentations and invited review papers on significant topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信