Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34055121›Full record

Trial reportPain research & management2021

Anaesthetic Efficacy of 4% Articaine in Comparison with 2% Lidocaine as Intraligamentary Injections after an Ineffective Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in Mandibular Molars with Irreversible Pulpitis: A Prospective Randomised Triple-Blind Clinical Trial.

Nazanin Zargar, Elnaz Shooshtari, Leila Pourmusavi, Alireza Akbarzadeh Baghban, Hengameh Ashraf, Ardavan Parhizkar

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pain research & management, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nazanin ZargarDepartment of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-4109-5128
Elnaz ShooshtariPrivate Practice, Kermanshah, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-8018-3956
Leila PourmusaviSchool of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-3899-1220
Alireza Akbarzadeh BaghbanProteomics Research Center, Department of Biostatistics, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-1026-4598
Hengameh AshrafDepartment of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-7507-4045
Ardavan ParhizkarIranian Centre for Endodontic Research, Research Institute for Dental Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-0712-2305
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRIslamic Azad University of Kermanshah · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of the current study was to compare the anaesthetic efficacy of supplemental intraligamentary (IL) injection of 4% articaine with that of 2% lidocaine in the mandibular first and second molars with irreversible pulpitis after an ineffective inferior alveolar nerve block injection (IANB) using the same anaesthetic in a randomised triple-blind clinical trial. Seventy-six adult patients, who were diagnosed with irreversible pulpitis in the mandibular first or second molars, were divided into 2 groups and received IANB randomly. In patients with lip numbness, anaesthesia was evaluated with the cold and electrical pulp (EPT) tests, and if the reported number on EPT was below 100, supplemental IL injection was administered using the same anaesthetic. The teeth were retested after 5 minutes. The Heft-Parker visual analogue scale was used to evaluate pain after IANB and IL injections. Statistical analysis was performed using repeated measures ANOVA, chi-square, and independent-sample and paired-sample

Indexed as

AdultAnesthetics, LocalCarticaineFemaleHumansInjectionsLidocaineLigamentsMaleMandibleMiddle AgedMolarNerve BlockPulpitisYoung AdultAnesthetics, LocalCarticaineLidocaine

Identifiers

PMID34055121
PMCPMC8131152
OpenAlexW3160438229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.