Is combination of buccal plus palatal injection better than the buccal alone during the endodontic treatment of maxillary molars using 2% lidocaine and 4articaine with same adrenaline concentration- A clinical study
- Conditions
- SYMPTOMATIC IRRVERSIBLE PULPITIS
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2021/05/033659
- Lead Sponsor
- Department of Oral Health Science Centre
- Brief Summary
The purpose of present study will plane the role of supplemental palatal infiltration or 4% articaine on the success rate of pulpal anesthesia of maxillary molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. Sixty six adult volunteer subjects will be selected from dental OPD. The subjects should be actively experiencing pain and in good health, and none will be taking any medication that would alter pain perception. The patients were randomly divided into three groups (GROUP I, II, III) twenty each. Patients will mark their pretreatment pain on a 170-mm HP VAS (12). Patients will receive in GROUP I: buccal infiltration1 of 1.8 mL lidocaine plus dummy palatal injection (BL), GROUP II) buccal plus palatal infiltrations of 2 mL lidocaine (BLL) and GROUP III buccal infiltration of 1.8 mL articaine plus dummy lingual injection (BA). The patients will be asked to rate their pain on HP VAS after 20 minutes of the infiltration during the conventional access opening procedure after rubber dam application. Success will be defined as no pain or weak/mild pain during endodontic access preparation and instrumentation (Heft-Parker VAS score<55mm). Age with initial and post injection pain of the subjects will be evaluated using multiple comparison analyses of variance (Kruskal-Wallis) and t tests at P < .05. Anesthetic success of all groups will be compared by using nonparametric chi-square χ2 test.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Not Yet Recruiting
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 60
- The inclusion criteria for the study were as follows: moderate to severe pain in the maxillary first molar, a prolonged response to cold testing with an ice stick and an electric pulp tester (Kerr Pulp Tester; Analytic Technology Corp, Redmond, WA), the absence of any periapical radiolucency on radiographs except for a widened periodontal ligament, a vital coronal pulp on access opening, and the ability of the subject to understand the use of pain scales.
- The subjects were in good health, and none were taking any medication that would alter pain perception, as determined by oral questioning and a written questionnaire.
The exclusion criteria for the study were as follows: subjects younger than 18 years of age or older than 50 years of age, any known sensitivity to either 2% lidocaine or 4% articaine or epinephrine, patients having active pain in more than 1 maxillary molar, subject taking any pain-relieving medication including over-the-counter analgesics at least 12 hours before enrollment in the study, and swelling near the tooth in question and having a tooth not suitable for simple restorative treatment because of extensive caries or periodontal problems.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Buccal infiltration injection alone effective in the maxillary molars pulpal anesthesia 2 hours
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method 3.4% articaine with adrenaline is more effective than 2% lidocaine with adrenaline as an infiltration anaesthetic 2 hours
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research
🇮🇳Chandigarh, CHANDIGARH, India
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research🇮🇳Chandigarh, CHANDIGARH, IndiaDr Umesh KumarPrincipal investigator09862969792odharmani911@gmail.com