Trial reportPloS one2019
Comparative evaluation of anesthetic efficacy of 1.8 mL and 3.6 mL of articaine in irreversible pulpitis of the mandibular molar: A randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02422823 (Comparative Evaluation of the Anesthetic Efficacy of 1,8mL and 3,6mL of 4% Articaine With 1), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
Comparative Evaluation of the Anesthetic Efficacy of 1,8mL and 3,6mL of 4% Articaine With 1: 100,000 Epinephrine in Blocking the Inferior Alveolar Nerve in Patients With Irreversible Pulpitis of Mandibular Molars
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Combined Versus Supplementary Injection Techniques With Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block for Mandibular Molars With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.International endodontic journal · 2025Pooled it
- Pain Management in Mandibular Molars With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: Mechanisms, Clinical Efficacy and Current Evidence: A Narrative Review.Pain research & management · 2026Review
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of local anesthesia approaches for symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Review
- Review
- Comparison between the Flapless Surgical Approach and a Novel Single Incision Access in Terms of Recovery Time and Comfort after Extraction of Impacted Inferior Third Molars: A Randomised, Blinded, Split-Mouth Controlled Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The impact of cigarette smoking on the efficiency of local anesthesia during simple tooth extraction.The Saudi dental journal · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Flapless Surgical Approach to Extract Impacted Inferior Third Molars: A Retrospective Clinical Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of two volumes of articaine in conventional inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) of mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis, and in cases of anesthetic failure, its complementation with periodontal ligament injection (PDL).
methodsNinety patients with irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars received conventional IANB with 1.8 mL or 3.6 mL of 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. In cases of IANB failure, the same volumes were administered in the PDL. Presence of pulpal anesthesia and absence/presence of pain during pulpectomy were evaluated by electric pulp stimulation and verbal analogue scale, respectively. Relative risks (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for each outcome.
results27% and 42% of the patients achieved pulpal anesthesia following IANB with 1.8 mL and 3.6 mL, respectively (RR = 0.63, CI 95% 0.35 to 1.14, p = 0.12). Analgesia during pulpectomy was present in 64% and 73% of the patients, respectively, for 1.8 mL and 3.6 mL (RR = 0.87, CI 95% 0.66 to 1.16, p = 0.36). In cases of IANB failure, 75% and 42% of the patients that received 1.8 mL and 3.6 mL of PDL injection, respectively, achieved pulpal anesthesia (RR = 1.80, CI 95% 0.87 to 3.72, p = 0.11). During a new attempt at the pulpectomy procedure, analgesia was present in 69% and 75% of the patients, respectively, for 1.8 mL and 3.6 mL (RR = 0.91, CI 95% 0.57 to 1.45, p = 0.71).
conclusionIncreasing the volume from 1.8 mL to 3.6 mL of the 4% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in the IANB and in the PDL, did not significantly increase the success rate of pulpal anesthesia and clinical analgesia during the pulpectomy procedure. Therefore, both volumes presented a similar efficacy, though neither resulted in effective pain control during irreversible pulpitis treatment.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02422823.
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.