A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of articaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltrations

J Endod. 2008 Apr;34(4):389-93. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.01.004. Epub 2008 Feb 7.

Abstract

The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind crossover study was to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in maxillary lateral incisors and first molars. Eighty subjects randomly received, in a double-blind manner, maxillary lateral incisor and first molar infiltrations of one cartridge of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine at two separate appointments spaced at least 1 week apart. In maxillary lateral incisors, articaine exhibited a significantly higher anesthetic success rate of 88% when compared with a 62% success rate with lidocaine. In maxillary first molars, articaine had a similar success rate to lidocaine (78% vs 73%), and there was no significant difference between the two solutions. In conclusion, a maxillary infiltration of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine statistically improved anesthetic success when compared with 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in the lateral incisor but not in the first molar.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Anesthesia, Dental / methods*
  • Anesthesia, Local / methods*
  • Anesthetics, Local / administration & dosage*
  • Carticaine / administration & dosage*
  • Cross-Over Studies
  • Dental Pulp Test
  • Double-Blind Method
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Incisor
  • Lidocaine / administration & dosage*
  • Male
  • Maxilla
  • Molar
  • Prospective Studies

Substances

  • Anesthetics, Local
  • Lidocaine
  • Carticaine