Comparative Evaluation of Articaine and Lignocaine for Palatal Anaesthesia Following Buccal Infiltration in Maxillary Extractions.
Keywords:
Articaine; Lignocaine; Palatal anaesthesia; Maxillary tooth extraction; Intraoperative pain control; Local anaesthesia; Pain perceptionAbstract
Background : Palatal injections administered during maxillary tooth extraction are often associated with significant discomfort and pain. Articaine, owing to its superior tissue diffusibility, may provide effective palatal anaesthesia following buccal infiltration alone and thereby reduce the need for painful palatal injections. This study compared the efficacy of Articaine and Lignocaine for palatal anaesthesia following buccal infiltration during maxillary tooth extraction.
Materials and Methods : A prospective randomized comparative clinical study was conducted among 40 patients requiring maxillary tooth extraction. Participants were randomly divided into two groups of 20 each. One group received 4% Articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine, while another Group received 2% Lignocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine through buccal infiltration. Parameters evaluated included onset of anaesthesia, duration of anaesthesia, pain during administration of anaesthesia, pain during extraction, postoperative pain, and need for re-anaesthesia. Pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software, and p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: The Articaine group demonstrated a significantly faster onset of anaesthesia (49.044 ± 7.098 seconds) compared to the Lignocaine group (93.150 ± 5.857 seconds) (p = 0.001). The duration of anaesthesia was significantly longer with Articaine (124.995 ± 6.972 minutes) than with Lignocaine (79.495 ± 12.102 minutes) (p = 0.001). Pain scores during administration, during the procedure, and after the procedure were consistently lower in the Articaine group. Re-anaesthesia was required in only 15% of patients receiving Articaine compared to 50% in the Lignocaine group (p = 0.020).
Conclusion: Articaine demonstrated superior anaesthetic efficacy compared to Lignocaine by providing faster onset, prolonged duration of anaesthesia, improved pain control, and reduced need for supplemental palatal injections during maxillary tooth extraction. Articaine may therefore be considered an effective alternative to Lignocaine for maxillary dental extractions.
Downloads
References
1.Website [Internet]. Available from: Oliveira, P., Volpato, M., Ramacciato, J. et al. Articaine and lignocaine efficiency in infiltration anaesthesia: a pilot study. Br Dent J 197, 45–46 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.481142
2. Al-Mahalawy H, El-Mahallawy Y, Abdelrahman HH, Refahee SM. Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study. BMC Oral Health. 2023 Aug 28;23(1):1–6.
3. Jain NK, John RR. Anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lignocaine during the surgical removal of the third molar: A comparative prospective study. Anesthesia Essays and Researches. 2016;10(2):356.
4. Website [Internet]. Available from: Meechan, J. Articaine and lignocaine. Evid Based Dent 12, 21–22 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6400779
5. Phyo HE, Chaiyasamut T, Kiattavorncharoen S, Pairuchvej V, Bhattarai BP, Wongsirichat N. Single buccal infiltration of high concentration lignocaine versus articaine in maxillary third molar surgery. Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. 2020 Aug 1;20(4):203–12.
6. Martin E, Nimmo A, Lee A, Jennings E. Articaine in dentistry: an overview of the evidence and meta-analysis of the latest randomised controlled trials on articaine safety and efficacy compared to lidocaine for routine dental treatment. BDJ Open. 2021 Jul 17;7(1):1–13.
7. Staedt H, Palarie V, Heimes D, Ottl P, Fan S, Kämmerer PW. Buffered 4% Articaine Reduces Pain and Enhances Anesthesia in Maxillary Third Molar Extractions: A Randomized, Double-Blind Split-Mouth Study. Biomedicines [Internet]. 2024 Nov 25;12(12). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines12122691
8. Gholami M, Banihashemrad A, Mohammadzadeh A, Ahrari F. The Efficacy of 4% Articaine Versus 2% Lidocaine in Inducing Palatal Anesthesia for Tooth Extraction in Different Maxillary Regions. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Aug;79(8):1643–9.
9. Chen S, Xiang J, Ji Y. Efficacy of Articaine vs Lignocaine for infiltration anaesthesia during primary molar extractions. Pak J Med Sci. 2022 Mar-Apr;38(4Part-II):1048–55.
10. Krishna S, Bhaskaran R, Kumar SP, Krishnan M, Krishna S, Bhaskaran R Sr. Comparison of the Efficacy Between Articaine and Lignocaine in Simultaneous Bilateral Orthodontic Maxillary Premolar Extractions: A Split-Mouth Comparative Study. Cureus [Internet]. 2023 Dec 6 [cited 2024 Oct 22];15(12). Available from: https://www.cureus.com/articles/192088-comparison-of-the-efficacy-between-articaine-and-lignocaine-in-simultaneous-bilateral-orthodontic-maxillary-premolar-extractions-a-split-mouth-comparative-study
11. Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. A comparison between articaine HCl and lidocaine HCl in pediatric dental patients. Pediatr Dent. 2000 Jul-Aug;22(4):307–11.
12. Claffey E, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck M, Weaver J. Anesthetic efficacy of articaine for inferior alveolar nerve blocks in patients with irreversible pulpitis. J Endod. 2004 Aug;30(8):568–71.
13. Yapp KE, Hopcraft MS, Parashos P. Dentists’ perceptions of a new local anaesthetic drug--articaine. Aust Dent J. 2012 Mar;57(1):18–22; quiz 109.
14. Costa CG, Tortamano IP, Rocha RG, Francischone CE, Tortamano N. Onset and duration periods of articaine and lidocaine on maxillary infiltration. Quintessence Int. 2005 Mar;36(3):197–201.
15. Jason AS, Sundaram GA, J P, Kumar SP, Krishnan M. Comparison of the Efficacy of Midazolam and Dexmedetomidine As Sedative Agents in Third Molar Surgery. Cureus. 2023 Nov;15(11):e49477.
16. The efficacy and safety of articaine versus lignocaine in dental treatments: A meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. 2010 Apr 1;38(4):307–17.
17. Krishna S, Selvarasu K, Kumar SP, Krishnan M. Efficacy of Different Techniques of the Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block for Mandibular Anesthesia: A Comparative Prospective Study. Cureus. 2024 Jan;16(1):e53277.
18. The pulpal anesthetic efficacy of articaine versus lidocaine in dentistry: A meta-analysis. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2011 May 1;142(5):493–504.
19. Sharma R, George M, Krishnan M. Efficacy of Preemptive Analgesia on Pain Perception After Simple Tooth Extraction: A Prospective Study. Cureus. 2024 Apr;16(4):e58262..
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
