ArticleJournal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine2024
Retrospective comparison of articaine buccal infiltration and lidocaine intraosseous anesthesia in carious mandibular molars.
Article in Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Articaine buccal infiltration and lidocaine intraosseous anesthesia in carious mandibular molars.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: It is vital to identify more efficient anesthesia techniques for the restorative or endodontic treatment of mandibular molars. Both articaine buccal infiltration anesthesia (ABI) and lidocaine inferior alveolar nerve block anesthesia (LIANB) may not provide profound anesthesia, necessitating supplementary anesthesia. This study aimed to investigate whether lidocaine intraosseous lidocaine intraosseous anesthesia (LIO) is more suitable than ABI as primary anesthesia for caries treatment of mandibular molars. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed patients treated for advanced caries according to the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) 5 and 6. The study involved 48 patients, split evenly between those receiving ABI and LIO, and examined the anesthesia success rate, pain during anesthesia, onset time, duration, and post-anesthesia lower lip numbness using Chi-square and Independent T-tests. Results: In the ABI group, 17 patients (70.8%) did not require additional anesthesia, whereas all 24 patients (100%) in the LIO group did not require additional anesthesia (P < 0.001). ABI was associated with significantly higher pain during anesthesia, slower onset time, and longer duration of anesthesia than LIO. There was no significant difference in post-anesthesia lower lip numbness between the two methods. Conclusion: Intraosseous anesthesia using lidocaine is more effective for treating severe caries in the mandibular molars because of its higher success rate, decreased pain during anesthesia, faster onset, and shorter recovery time.
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.