A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Comparison of 2% Lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epinephrine, 4% Prilocaine with 1:200,000 Epinephrine, and 4% Prilocaine for Maxillary Infiltrations

Overview

Journal Anesth Prog

Specialties Anesthesiology
Dentistry

Date 2010 Jun 18

PMID 20553134

Citations 17

Authors

Steven Katz

Melissa Drum

Al Reader

John Nusstein

Mike Beck

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind crossover study was to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine, 4% prilocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine, and 4% prilocaine in maxillary lateral incisors and first molars. Sixty subjects randomly received, in a double-blind manner, maxillary lateral incisor and first molar infiltrations of 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine, 1.8 mL of 4% prilocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine, and 1.8 mL of 4% prilocaine, at 3 separate appointments spaced at least 1 week apart. The teeth were pulp-tested in 3-minute cycles for a total of 60 minutes. Anesthetic success (ie, obtaining 2 consecutive 80 readings with the electric pulp tester) and onset of pulpal anesthesia were not significantly different between 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine, 4% prilocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine, and 4% prilocaine for the lateral incisor and first molar. For both lateral incisor and first molar, 4% prilocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine and 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine were equivalent for incidence of pulpal anesthesia. However, neither anesthetic agent provided an hour of pulpal anesthesia. For both lateral incisor and first molar, 4% prilocaine provided a significantly shorter duration of pulpal anesthesia compared with 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine and 4% prilocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine.

Citing Articles

Buccal versus buccal palatal infiltration for pulpal anesthesia using 2% lidocaine and 4% articaine: A randomized controlled trial.

Kumar U, Garg N, Vashisht R, Kumari A, Kaur C, Rajput A J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2024; 14(2):205-210.

PMID: 38445050 PMC: 10912647. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2024.02.004.

Success of Pulpal Anesthesia Following Buccal Infiltration of the Maxillary First Molar With 1.8 mL and 3.6 mL of 4% Articaine With 1:100,000 Epinephrine: A Prospective, Randomized Crossover Study.

Woo A, Nusstein J, Drum M, Fowler S, Reader A, Ni A Anesth Prog. 2023; 70(3):110-115.

PMID: 37850677 PMC: 11080968. DOI: 10.2344/anpr-70-03-01.

Pulpal anesthesia of maxillary first molars using 4% articaine infiltration in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Afkhami F, Rostami G, Peters O, Kamalian F Clin Oral Investig. 2023; 27(7):3999-4006.

PMID: 37243822 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05025-y.

Local Anesthetic Efficacy in Marijuana Users and Nonusers: A Pilot Study.

Moran M, Heaton L, Leroux B, Flake N Anesth Prog. 2022; 69(4):15-21.

PMID: 36534774 PMC: 9773404. DOI: 10.2344/anpr-69-02-08.

Anesthetic efficacies of buccal with palatal injection versus buccal with intra-septal injection in permanent maxillary first molars of pediatric patients.

Areenoo P, Manmontri C, Chaipattanawan N, Chompu-Inwai P, Khanijou M, Kumchai T J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2022; 22(4):239-254.

PMID: 35991357 PMC: 9358269. DOI: 10.17245/jdapm.2022.22.4.239.

References

Mikesell A, Drum M, Reader A, Beck M . Anesthetic efficacy of 1.8 mL and 3.6 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine for maxillary infiltrations. J Endod. 2008; 34(2):121-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.11.001. View

Nusstein J, Wood M, Reader A, Beck M, Weaver J . Comparison of the degree of pulpal anesthesia achieved with the intraosseous injection and infiltration injection using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. Gen Dent. 2005; 53(1):50-3. View

Gross R, McCartney M, Reader A, Beck M . A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of bupivacaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltrations. J Endod. 2007; 33(9):1021-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.06.003. View

Certosimo A, Archer R . A clinical evaluation of the electric pulp tester as an indicator of local anesthesia. Oper Dent. 1996; 21(1):25-30. View

Costa C, Tortamano I, Rocha R, Francischone C, Tortamano N . Onset and duration periods of articaine and lidocaine on maxillary infiltration. Quintessence Int. 2005; 36(3):197-201. View

NORDENRAM A, Danielsson K . Local anaesthesia in elderly patients. An experimental study of oral infiltration anaesthesia. Swed Dent J. 1990; 14(1):19-24. View

Evans G, Nusstein J, Drum M, Reader A, Beck M . A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of articaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltrations. J Endod. 2008; 34(4):389-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.01.004. View

Fortsch G . Pulpal anesthesia dependent on epinephrine dose in 2% lidocaine. A randomized controlled double-blind crossover study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1992; 73(5):537-40. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(92)90091-4. View

Petersen J, Luck H, Kristensen F, Mikkelsen L . A comparison of four commonly used local analgesics. Int J Oral Surg. 1977; 6(1):51-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0300-9785(77)80059-8. View

10.

Hinkley S, Reader A, Beck M, Meyers W . An evaluation of 4% prilocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine and 2% mepivacaine with 1:20,000 levonordefrin compared with 2% lidocaine with:100,000 epinephrine for inferior alveolar nerve block. Anesth Prog. 1991; 38(3):84-9. PMC: 2161976. View

11.

Haas D, Harper D, Saso M, Young E . Comparison of articaine and prilocaine anesthesia by infiltration in maxillary and mandibular arches. Anesth Prog. 1990; 37(5):230-7. PMC: 2148603. View

12.

Mason R, Drum M, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck M . A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 and 1:50,000 epinephrine and 3% mepivacaine for maxillary infiltrations. J Endod. 2009; 35(9):1173-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.06.016. View

13.

Haas D, Harper D, Saso M, Young E . Lack of differential effect by Ultracaine (articaine) and Citanest (prilocaine) in infiltration anaesthesia. J Can Dent Assoc. 1991; 57(3):217-23. View

14.

Brown G, Ward N . Prilocaine and lignocaine plus adrenaline. A clinical comparison. Br Dent J. 1969; 126(12):557-62. View

15.

Dreven L, Reader A, Beck M, Meyers W, Weaver J . An evaluation of an electric pulp tester as a measure of analgesia in human vital teeth. J Endod. 1987; 13(5):233-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0099-2399(87)80097-3. View

16.

Premdas C, Pitt Ford T . Effect of palatal injections on pulpal blood flow in premolars. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1995; 11(6):274-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1995.tb00503.x. View

17.

Vahatalo K, Antila H, Lehtinen R . Articaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltration anesthesia. Anesth Prog. 1993; 40(4):114-6. PMC: 2148588. View

18.

Pitt Ford T, Seare M, McDonald F . Action of adrenaline on the effect of dental local anaesthetic solutions. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1993; 9(1):31-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1993.tb00457.x. View

19.

Chng H, Pitt Ford T, McDonald F . Effects of prilocaine local anaesthetic solutions on pulpal blood flow in maxillary canines. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1996; 12(2):89-95. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1996.tb00103.x. View

20.

Mclean C, Reader A, Beck M, Meryers W . An evaluation of 4% prilocaine and 3% mepivacaine compared with 2% lidocaine (1:100,000 epinephrine) for inferior alveolar nerve block. J Endod. 1993; 19(3):146-50. DOI: 10.1016/s0099-2399(06)80510-8. View