Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine

The Korean Dental Society of Anesthsiology (대한치과마취과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Buffered articaine infiltration for primary maxillary molar extractions: a randomized controlled study

  • Dhake, Parag (Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, VSPM's Dental College and Research Centre) ;
  • Nagpal, Devendra (Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, VSPM's Dental College and Research Centre) ;
  • Chaudhari, Purva (Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, VSPM's Dental College and Research Centre) ;
  • Lamba, Gagandeep (Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, VSPM's Dental College and Research Centre) ;
  • Hotwani, Kavita (Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, VSPM's Dental College and Research Centre) ;
  • Singh, Prabhat (Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, VSPM's Dental College and Research Centre)
  • Received : 2022.07.05
  • Accepted : 2022.09.18
  • Published : 2022.10.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Dental pain management is an important aspect of patient management in pediatric dentistry. Articaine is considered the most successful anesthetic agent for infiltration anesthesia. Buffered articaine has been observed to have faster onset and longer duration of action with less pain on injection. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare pain on injection, onset of action, and pain during extraction using buffered (using Sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3)) and non-buffered 4% articaine (with 1:100000 adrenaline) infiltrations for primary maxillary molar extractions in 4-10-year-old children. Methods: Seventy children who required extraction of maxillary primary molars were enrolled in this triple-blind randomized study. Children undergoing extraction were randomly divided into two groups, with 35 in each group. The study group was the buffered articaine group; the control group was the non-buffered articaine group. Buccal and palatal infiltrations were administered with either buffered or non-buffered articaine. Subjective evaluation was done for pain on injection, pain during extraction using Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale (WBFPR) and onset of anesthesia in seconds. Pain on injection, pain during extraction were objectively evaluated using Sound Eye Motor (SEM) scale and onset of anesthesia was also evaluated objectively by pricking with sharp dental probe. Results: The outcome was, significantly less pain on injection and significantly faster onset of anesthesia with significantly less pain during extraction for both subjective and objective evaluations in the buffered articaine group. Subgroup analysis was also performed and it showed variable results, with only significant difference for WBFPR scores in age subgroup 4-7 years for palatal infiltration. Conclusion: Less pain on injection, faster onset of anesthesia, and less pain during extraction were observed when buffered articaine was used for maxillary primary molar extraction.

Keywords

References

  1. Hemmanur S, Nasim I. Randomized clinical trial of anesthetic efficacy of buffered versus conventional local anesthetic agent in patient with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. J Pharm Res Int 2020; 32: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.9734/jpri/2020/v32i1730662
  2. Malamed SF. Local anesthesia. J Calif Dent Assoc 1998; 26: 657, 660.
  3. Mittal M, Sharma S, Kumar A, Chopra R, Srivastava D. Comparison of anesthetic efficacy of articaine and lidocaine during primary maxillary molar extractions in children. Pediatr Dent 2015; 37: 520-4.
  4. Chopra R, Jindal G, Sachdev V, Sandhu M. Double-blind crossover study to compare pain experience during inferior alveolar nerve block administration using buffered two percent lidocaine in children. Pediatr Dent 2016; 38: 25-9.
  5. Uckan S, Dayangac E, Araz K. Is permanent maxillary tooth removal without palatal injection possible? Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 102: 733-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.12.005
  6. Malamed SF, Falkel M. Buffered local anaesthetics: the importance of pH and CO2. SAAD Dig 2013; 29: 9-17.
  7. Day TK, Skarda RT. The pharmacology of local anesthetics. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 1991; 7: 489-500. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-0739(17)30482-0
  8. Christoph RA, Buchanan L, Begalla K, Schwartz S. Pain reduction in local anesthetic administration through pH buffering. Ann Emerg Med 1988; 17: 117-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-0644(88)80293-2
  9. Eppley BL, Sadove AM. Reduction in injection pain by buffering of local anesthetic solutions. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989; 47: 762-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(89)80023-0
  10. Amorim KS, Fontes VTS, Gercina AC, Groppo FC, Souza LMA. Buffered 2% articaine versus non-buffered 4% articaine in maxillary infiltration: randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2021; 25: 3527-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03674-x
  11. Kurien RS, Goswami M, Singh S. Comparative evaluation of anesthetic efficacy of warm, buffered and conventional 2% lignocaine for the success of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in mandibular primary molars: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2018; 12: 102-9. https://doi.org/10.15171/joddd.2018.016
  12. M M A, Khatri A, Kalra N, Tyagi R, Khandelwal D. Pain perception and efficacy of local analgesia using 2% lignocaine, buffered lignocaine, and 4% articaine in pediatric dental procedures. J Dent Anesth Pain Med 2019; 19: 101-9. https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2019.19.2.101
  13. Shurtz R, Nusstein J, Reader A, Drum M, Fowler S, Beck M. Buffered 4% articaine as a primary buccal infiltration of the mandibular first molar: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. J Endod 2015; 41: 1403-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.05.005
  14. Goodchild JH, Donaldson M. Novel direct injection chairside buffering technique for local anesthetic use in dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2019; 40: e1-10.
  15. Local Infiltration of the Palate. in Local Anesthesia in Pediatric Dentistry. CE Course of dentalcare.com [Internet]. Available from https://www.dentalcare.com/en-us/professional-education/ce-courses/ce325/local-infiltration-of-the-palate
  16. Meincken M, Norman C, Arevalo O, Saman DM, Bejarano T. Anesthesia onset time and injection pain between buffered and unbuffered lidocaine used as local anesthetic for dental care in children. Pediatr Dent 2019; 15; 41: 354-7.
  17. Saatchi M, Khademi A, Baghaei B, Noormohammadi H. Effect of sodium bicarbonate-buffered lidocaine on the success of inferior alveolar nerve block for teeth with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a prospective, randomized double-blind study. J Endod 2015; 41: 33-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.09.011