Trial reportClinical oral investigations2013
Efficacy and safety of intraseptal and periodontal ligament anesthesia achieved by computer-controlled articaine + epinephrine delivery: a dose-finding study.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Intraseptal injection as an alternative for palatal infiltration in vital maxillary first permanent molars of 6- to 18-year-old patients: a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Trial
- The efficacy of supplemental intraseptal and buccal infiltration anesthesia in mandibular molars of patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.Clinical oral investigations · 2020Trial
- Anesthetic efficacies of intrapapillary injection in comparison to inferior alveolar nerve block for mandibular premolar extraction: a randomized clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2020Trial
- Comparison of Pain Perception Using Conventional Versus Computer-Controlled Intraligamentary Local Anesthetic Injection for Extraction of Primary Molars.Anesthesia progress · 2019Trial
- Anesthetic Efficacy of Articaine and Lidocaine in a Primary Intraseptal Injection: A Prospective, Randomized Double-Blind Study.Anesthesia progress · 2017Trial
- Efficacy and safety of intraseptal and periodontal ligament anaesthesia for extraction of upper lateral incisors and lower first premolars in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Intraosseous Local Anesthesia (QuickSleeper 5) During Pulpotomy and Stainless Steel Crown Placement on Mandibular Primary Molars: A Crossover Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Assessing the Impact of Mandibular Molar Root Length on Success in Supplemental Intraligamentary Injection for Irreversible Pulpitis.Iranian endodontic journal · 2024Article
- Patient discomfort and intensity of intraseptal anesthesia of computer-controlled articaine/epinephrine delivery for scaling and root planing.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- Efficacy of intraseptal anesthesia obtained by computer-controlled articaine with epinephrine delivery in scaling and root planing.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- Anesthetic efficacies of buccal with palatal injection versus buccal with intra-septal injection in permanent maxillary first molars of pediatric patients.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2022Review
- Anatomic feasibility of a modified 3-distal site anesthesia injection method for impacted mandibular third molar extraction using cone-beam computed tomography.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Efficacy of intraligamentary anesthesia in maxillary first molar extraction.Journal of pain research · 2018Article
- Role of intraseptal anesthesia for pain-free dental treatment.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe main purpose of this study was to evaluate the dose-dependent anesthetic efficacy of the intraseptal anesthesia (ISA) and periodontal ligament anesthesia (PLA) obtained with different volumes of 4 % articaine and 1:100,000 epinephrine (Ar + Ep) in human mandibular premolars, using a computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS). The safety profile of Ar + Ep was also studied by investigating the stability of cardiovascular parameters. MATERIAL AND
methodsOne hundred and eighty randomly selected healthy volunteers (ASA I) entered the single-blinded study to receive 16 mg + 4 μg, 24 mg + 6 μg, and 32 mg + 8 μg of Ar + Ep, obtained with different volumes (0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 ml, respectively), for the ISA and PLA. Success rate, onset, and duration of profound pulpal anesthesia were evaluated by the electrical pulp tester, while the width of the anesthetic field and duration of soft tissue anesthesia were recorded using the pinprick testing. A monitor was used for the measurement of cardiovascular parameters.
resultsA dose-dependent duration of pulpal and soft tissue anesthesia was obtained only by the ISA. Success rate, duration of both pulpal and soft tissue anesthesia, and its width were significantly better in the ISA compared with the PLA. No significant cardiovascular changes were seen in both groups.
conclusionsIt can be suggested that 0.6 and 0.8 ml of 4 % Ar + 1:100,000 Ep, delivered by CCLADS, offer high success rate and effective clinical parameters of ISA as a primary anesthesia. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It seems that dental procedures requiring profound pulpal, bone, and soft tissue anesthesia could be effectively and safely obtained by mentioned anesthetic protocol.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.