Comparing the Efficiency of 2% Lidocaine and 4% Articaine as a Local Anesthetic Agent in Children

Nair, Manisha; Jeevanandan, Ganesh; Mohan, Meenakshi

doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2018.v11i5.24440

Cited by 4 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Details of excluded studies [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] with reasons are presented in Table-I. A total of 6 RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis [24][25][26][27][28][29]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The age of patients in the trials varied from 5 to 14 years. Four studies [26][27][28][29] were conducted only on maxillary primary molar extractions while the remaining 24,25 included both maxillary and mandibular procedures. Two studies 26,28 were three-armed trials wherein only buccal infiltration Efficacy of Articaine vs Lignocaine for infiltration anaesthesia of articaine and lignocaine was compared with buccal and palatal infiltration of lignocaine.…”

Section: (Table-ii)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy of Articaine vs Lignocaine for infiltration anaesthesia during primary molar extractions

Chen¹,

Xiang²,

2022

Pak J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate if articaine has better efficacy as compared to lignocaine when used for infiltration anaesthesia for primary molar extractions. Methods: The electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, BioMed Central, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar were searched up to August 2020. Randomized controlled trials on paediatric patients comparing the infiltration of articaine with lignocaine for extraction of primary molar were included. Pain of extraction and successful palatal/lingual anaesthesia with single buccal infiltration was evaluated. Results: Six studies were included. We found no difference in pain scores when comparing singular buccal infiltrations of articaine and lignocaine for primary molar extractions. A meta-analysis of extraction pain scores from three studies indicated no statistically significant difference between buccal infiltration of articaine vs combined buccal and palatal/lingual infiltration of lignocaine. Comparing buccal with palatal/lingual infiltration of both articaine and lignocaine with data from three studies, articaine was found to significantly reduce pain scores. Conclusion: Our review encompassing a limited number of studies suggests that single buccal infiltration of articaine may have a role in primary molar extractions. Articaine may have a better anaesthetic effect compared to lignocaine but the difference may not be clinically relevant. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.38.4.5343 How to cite this:Chen S, Xiang J, Ji Y. Efficacy of Articaine vs Lignocaine for infiltration anaesthesia during primary molar extractions. Pak J Med Sci. 2022;38(4):---------. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.38.4.5343 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: (Table-ii)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Articaine vs Lignocaine for infiltration anaesthesia during primary molar extractions

Chen¹,

Xiang²,

2022

Pak J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The dose was calculated according to the child's weight. For buccal infiltration, 1.5 ml of the anesthetic solution was injected at the depth of the buccal vestibule within reflected mucosa between the roots of the first mandibular primary molar according to Nair et al (2018) 12 . The needle was inserted with its bevel directed toward the bone making angle 45 0 with the buccal aspect of the jaw.…”

Section: Intra-operative Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anesthetic Efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent Versus 2% Mepecaine-L for Infiltration Anesthesia in Extraction of Badly Decayed Lower First Primary Molars: A Pilot Study

Hosny

Gawad

Aly

2021

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent anesthetic solution compared to 2% Mepecaine-L anesthetic solution in extraction of badly decayed mandibular first primary molar for infiltration in children aged from 6 to 8 years.Methodology: Twenty children with 20 badly decayed mandibular first primary molars indicated for extraction divided randomly into two equal groups (n= 10), group A received 4% Artpharmadent and group B received 2% Mepecaine-L anesthetic solution for infiltration. Intraoperative pain, the need for supplemental injection during extraction, adverse effects following the anesthetic injection, and the clinical success of the treatment were evaluated for both groups.Results: Both groups showed nearly similar results regarding intraoperative pain using Wong-Baker Face Pain Scale (WBFPS), and Sound, eyes, and motor (SEM) scale, regarding the need for supplemental injection during the extraction, and the adverse effects following the anesthetic injection (non-significant difference statistically).Conclusions: Both the 4% Artpharmadent and 2% Mepecaine-L are equally effective in controlling intraoperative pain during the extraction of mandibular molars and both are safe when used in children.

show abstract

“…A series of catalytic reactions with different bases, namely Et 3 N, DIPEA and DBU (organic soluble bases), as well as some inorganic bases, viz. K 2 CO 3 and Cs 2 CO 3 were carried out (entries [19][20][21][22]. In spite of the wide range of bases analyzed, Et 3 N provided the optimum result in terms of yield.…”

Section: Paper Syn Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A testament to the growing importance of aminocarbonylation 14 can be visualized in the form of the several well-known amide-cored compounds that have been identified in several commercially important molecules, natural products, and biologically active motifs in a variety of drug molecules (Figure 1). [15][16][17][18][19][20] Amongst the molecules of synthetic and biological relevance that have been highlighted above, echiguanine 16 A and sangivamycin 15 are particularly important due to the presence of a privileged nucleoside scaffold. In past decades, significant progress has been made on nucleoside chemistry, 21 ranging from their synthesis, modification and photophysical examination, leading to their potential exploration in the field of medicines.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pd/PTABS: An Efficient Catalytic System for the Aminocarbonylation of a Sugar-Protected Nucleoside

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A highly efficient and mild protocol for the aminocarbonylation of a nucleoside is developed by employing palladium/(1,3,5-triaza-7-phosphaadamantan-1-ium-1-yl)butane-1-sulfonate (Pd/PTABS) as the catalytic system. The developed aminocarbonylation methodology employs CO gas at a relatively low temperature of 60 °C and is suitable for a wide range of amines, including (heteroaryl)benzylic, aliphatic acyclic, alicyclic and secondary amines. This protocol is also utilized for the synthesis of a sangivamycin precursor by carrying out the Pd-catalyzed amination and aminocarbonylation simultaneously. The utility of this protocol is further demonstrated by the synthesis of the drugs moclobemide and nikethamide.

show abstract

Comparing the Efficiency of 2% Lidocaine and 4% Articaine as a Local Anesthetic Agent in Children

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Efficacy of Articaine vs Lignocaine for infiltration anaesthesia during primary molar extractions

Efficacy of Articaine vs Lignocaine for infiltration anaesthesia during primary molar extractions

Anesthetic Efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent Versus 2% Mepecaine-L for Infiltration Anesthesia in Extraction of Badly Decayed Lower First Primary Molars: A Pilot Study

Pd/PTABS: An Efficient Catalytic System for the Aminocarbonylation of a Sugar-Protected Nucleoside

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About