ArticleJournal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine2026
Comparison of anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) injection and buccal infiltration as single-injection anesthetic techniques for orthodontic extraction of maxillary first premolars: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial.
Article in Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pain and anxiety regarding local anesthetic injections are common concerns during orthodontic tooth extraction. Single-injection anesthetic techniques may reduce patient discomfort while maintaining adequate pain control by eliminating the need for separate buccal and palatal injections. This study compared the anesthetic efficacy, pain perception, onset and duration of anesthesia, and postoperative analgesia linked to anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) injection versus buccal infiltration for maxillary first premolar extraction. Methods: This assessor-blinded randomized split-mouth clinical trial enrolled 42 orthodontic patients (mean age, 18.5 ± 3.12 years; range, 13-24 years) requiring bilateral extraction of maxillary first premolars. The participants received an AMSA injection and buccal infiltration in the contralateral quadrant during two visits, spaced 10 days apart. Both techniques utilized 1.2 mL of 4% articaine with adrenaline (1:100,000) via a 30-gauge needle. The outcomes included anesthetic success, pain during injection and extraction assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm), onset and duration of anesthesia, and postoperative analgesia. Anesthetic success was defined as completion of extraction without supplemental anesthesia. Supplemental anesthesia was administered when intraoperative pain exceeded 44 mm on the VAS, and the primary anesthetic technique was classified as unsuccessful. McNemar's test and the paired Student's t-test were used for statistical comparisons. Results: Anesthetic success rates were 85.7% for AMSA injection and 78.6% for buccal infiltration, with no significant difference (P = 0.58; matched OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.52-4.92). AMSA injection produced a significantly faster onset and longer duration of palatal anesthesia, whereas buccal infiltration produced a significantly faster onset and longer duration of buccal anesthesia (P < 0.001). AMSA injection caused greater injection-related pain (P < 0.001; Cohen's dz = 0.68), but lower extraction-related pain (P < 0.001; Cohen's dz = 0.82). Buccal infiltration achieved a longer postoperative analgesia duration (P = 0.006; Cohen's dz = 0.57). Conclusions: Both techniques are effective single-injection options for maxillary first premolar extraction. AMSA provided superior intraoperative comfort and palatal anesthesia, but inflicts greater injection discomfort, while buccal infiltration offered greater injection comfort and longer postoperative analgesia.
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.