ArticleSaudi journal of anaesthesia
Does articaine, rather than prilocaine, increase the success rate of anaesthesia for extraction of maxillary teeth.
Article in Saudi journal of anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04236115 (Does Articaine, Rather Than Prilocaine, Increase the Success Rate of Anaesthesia for Extraction of Maxillary Teeth), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Does Articaine, Rather Than Prilocaine, Increase the Success Rate of Anaesthesia for Extraction of Maxillary Teeth
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rules of selection for a safe local anesthetic in dentistry.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2023Article
- Review
- Effect of local anesthetics on renal function: An animal study in Iran.Dental research journal · 2023Article
- Local anesthesia in oral and maxillofacial surgery: A review of current opinion.Journal of dental sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the anesthetic performances of 3% prilocaine and 4% articaine when used for the extraction of the maxillary teeth. MATERIALS AND
methodsNinety-five patients, aged between 16 and 70 years, were included in this study. Patients were divided into two groups. Group one received articaine 4% with 1:00.000 adrenaline. Group two received prilocaine with 3% felypressin (0.03 I.U. per ml). Onset time of anesthesia was objectively evaluated by using electronic pulp testing.
resultsEighty-five patients in this study had a successful local anesthetic followed by extraction within the study duration time (10 minutes). However, there were six patients with failure anesthesia (5 in prilocaine group and 1 in articaine group). By applying Person's Chi-square test (x2), there were no significant differences in the number of episodes of the anesthetic success between articaine and prilocaine groups at time intervals (
conclusions3% Prilocaine with felypressin is as effective as 4% articaine with adrenaline when used for the extraction of maxillary teeth. Recommendations would be given to the dental practitioners to use prilocaine more frequently than articaine because of its low toxicity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04236115.
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.