Comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractions

Objective: To investigate the speed of action and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine for upper teeth extractions. Materials and Methods: Forty-five patients were included in the articaine 4% group, and 45 in the mepivacaine 2% control group. After all injections, soft and hard t...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Giath Gazal, Rashdan Alharbi, Wamiq Musheer Fareed, Esam Omar, Albraa Badr Alolayan, Hassan Al-Zoubi, Ahmad A Alnazzawi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2017-01-01
Series:Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.saudija.org/article.asp?issn=1658-354X;year=2017;volume=11;issue=2;spage=152;epage=157;aulast=Gazal
id doaj-15daac5387f148bda77d69641f8936a0
record_format Article
spelling doaj-15daac5387f148bda77d69641f8936a02020-11-25T00:19:45ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsSaudi Journal of Anaesthesia1658-354X2017-01-0111215215710.4103/1658-354X.203017Comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractionsGiath GazalRashdan AlharbiWamiq Musheer FareedEsam OmarAlbraa Badr AlolayanHassan Al-ZoubiAhmad A AlnazzawiObjective: To investigate the speed of action and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine for upper teeth extractions. Materials and Methods: Forty-five patients were included in the articaine 4% group, and 45 in the mepivacaine 2% control group. After all injections, soft and hard tissue numbness was objectively gauged by dental probe at intervals of 15 s. Furthermore, the discomfort of the injections were recorded by the patients after each treatment on standard 100 mm visual analog scales, tagged at the endpoints with “no pain” (0 mm) and “unbearable pain” (100 mm). Results: There were significant differences in the meantime of first numbness to associated palatal mucosa and tooth of patients between mepivacaine and articaine buccal infiltration (BI) groups P = 0.01 and 0.01. Patients in the articaine group recorded earlier palatal mucosa and teeth numbness than those in the mepivacaine group. With regards to the discomfort of the needle injections, palatal injection was significantly more painful than BI (t-test: P< 0.001). Articaine buccal injection was significantly more painful than mepivacaine buccal injection (t-test: P<0.001). However, articaine palatal injection was less painful than articaine BI. Clinically, anesthesia onset time was faster in anterior upper teeth than upper middle and posterior teeth. Conclusions: BIs with 4% articaine was faster in achieving palate and teeth anesthesia than 2% mepivacaine for extraction of upper maxillary teeth. Patients in mepivacaine BI and articaine palatal injection groups reported less pain with needle injection. Failure of anesthesia was noticeable with maxillary multiple-rooted teeth.http://www.saudija.org/article.asp?issn=1658-354X;year=2017;volume=11;issue=2;spage=152;epage=157;aulast=GazalArticaine; buccal infiltration; mepivacaine; needle discomfort; teeth extraction
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Giath Gazal
Rashdan Alharbi
Wamiq Musheer Fareed
Esam Omar
Albraa Badr Alolayan
Hassan Al-Zoubi
Ahmad A Alnazzawi
spellingShingle Giath Gazal
Rashdan Alharbi
Wamiq Musheer Fareed
Esam Omar
Albraa Badr Alolayan
Hassan Al-Zoubi
Ahmad A Alnazzawi
Comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractions
Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia
Articaine; buccal infiltration; mepivacaine; needle discomfort; teeth extraction
author_facet Giath Gazal
Rashdan Alharbi
Wamiq Musheer Fareed
Esam Omar
Albraa Badr Alolayan
Hassan Al-Zoubi
Ahmad A Alnazzawi
author_sort Giath Gazal
title Comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractions
title_short Comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractions
title_full Comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractions
title_fullStr Comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractions
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractions
title_sort comparison of onset anesthesia time and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine during teeth extractions
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
series Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia
issn 1658-354X
publishDate 2017-01-01
description Objective: To investigate the speed of action and injection discomfort of 4% articaine and 2% mepivacaine for upper teeth extractions. Materials and Methods: Forty-five patients were included in the articaine 4% group, and 45 in the mepivacaine 2% control group. After all injections, soft and hard tissue numbness was objectively gauged by dental probe at intervals of 15 s. Furthermore, the discomfort of the injections were recorded by the patients after each treatment on standard 100 mm visual analog scales, tagged at the endpoints with “no pain” (0 mm) and “unbearable pain” (100 mm). Results: There were significant differences in the meantime of first numbness to associated palatal mucosa and tooth of patients between mepivacaine and articaine buccal infiltration (BI) groups P = 0.01 and 0.01. Patients in the articaine group recorded earlier palatal mucosa and teeth numbness than those in the mepivacaine group. With regards to the discomfort of the needle injections, palatal injection was significantly more painful than BI (t-test: P< 0.001). Articaine buccal injection was significantly more painful than mepivacaine buccal injection (t-test: P<0.001). However, articaine palatal injection was less painful than articaine BI. Clinically, anesthesia onset time was faster in anterior upper teeth than upper middle and posterior teeth. Conclusions: BIs with 4% articaine was faster in achieving palate and teeth anesthesia than 2% mepivacaine for extraction of upper maxillary teeth. Patients in mepivacaine BI and articaine palatal injection groups reported less pain with needle injection. Failure of anesthesia was noticeable with maxillary multiple-rooted teeth.
topic Articaine; buccal infiltration; mepivacaine; needle discomfort; teeth extraction
url http://www.saudija.org/article.asp?issn=1658-354X;year=2017;volume=11;issue=2;spage=152;epage=157;aulast=Gazal
work_keys_str_mv AT giathgazal comparisonofonsetanesthesiatimeandinjectiondiscomfortof4articaineand2mepivacaineduringteethextractions
AT rashdanalharbi comparisonofonsetanesthesiatimeandinjectiondiscomfortof4articaineand2mepivacaineduringteethextractions
AT wamiqmusheerfareed comparisonofonsetanesthesiatimeandinjectiondiscomfortof4articaineand2mepivacaineduringteethextractions
AT esamomar comparisonofonsetanesthesiatimeandinjectiondiscomfortof4articaineand2mepivacaineduringteethextractions
AT albraabadralolayan comparisonofonsetanesthesiatimeandinjectiondiscomfortof4articaineand2mepivacaineduringteethextractions
AT hassanalzoubi comparisonofonsetanesthesiatimeandinjectiondiscomfortof4articaineand2mepivacaineduringteethextractions
AT ahmadaalnazzawi comparisonofonsetanesthesiatimeandinjectiondiscomfortof4articaineand2mepivacaineduringteethextractions
_version_ 1725370271081168896