A comparison of the clinical anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 0.5% bupivacaine (both with 1:200,000 epinephrine) for lower third molar removal.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the clinical efficacy of 4% articaine (A200) and 0.5% bupivacaine (B200), both with 1:200,000 epinephrine, for lower third molar removal. STUDY DESIGN: Fifty patients underwent removal of symmetrically positioned lower third molars, in 2 separate appointments, under local anesthesia either with A200 or B200, in a double-blind, randomized, and crossover manner. Time to onset, duration of postoperative analgesia, duration of anesthetic action on soft tissues, intraoperative bleeding, and hemodynamic parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference between the time to onset of A200 (1.66 +/- 0.13 minutes) and B200 (2.51 +/- 0.21 minutes) was found (P < .05). There was no statistically significant difference in the duration of analgesia, whether the patient was subjected to osteotomy or not, regardless of the local anesthetic used (3 to 4 hours; P > .05). However, when patients received B200 they experienced a statistically significant longer period of anesthesia on the soft tissues as compared with when they had received A200 (around 5 hours and 4 hours, respectively, P < .05). The surgeon's rating of intraoperative bleeding was considered very close to minimal for both anesthetics. In the surgeries with osteotomy, the comparison between A200 and B200 showed statistically significant differences in the diastolic (64 mm Hg and 68 mm Hg, respectively, P = .001) and mean arterial pressure (86 mm Hg and 89 mm Hg, respectively, P = .031) when data from all the surgical phases were pooled. Additionally, the mouth opening at the suture removal was statistically different for A200 and B200 solutions (91.90% +/- 3.00% and 88.57% +/- 2.38% of the preoperative measure, respectively) when surgeries required bone removal (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with 0.5% bupivacaine, 4% articaine (both with 1:200,000 epinephrine) provided a shorter time to onset and comparable hemostasis and postoperative pain control with a shorter duration of soft tissue anesthesia in lower third molar removal.

Epinephrine concentration (1:100,000 or 1:200,000) does not affect the clinical efficacy of 4% articaine for lower third molar removal: a double-blind, randomized, crossover study.

PURPOSE: This study compared the use of 4% articaine in association with 1:100,000 (10 mug/mL; A100) or 1:200,000 (5 mug/mL; A200) epinephrine in lower third molar removal. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty healthy volunteers underwent removal of symmetrically positioned lower third molars, in 2 separate appointments, under local anesthesia with either A100 or A200, in a double-blind, randomized, and crossed manner. Latency, duration of postoperative analgesia, duration of anesthetic action on soft tissues, intraoperative bleeding, and hemodynamic parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: A100 and A200 presented very similar latency (1.64 +/- 0.08 and 1.58 +/- 0.08 minutes, respectively; P > .05). Identical volumes of both anesthetic solutions were used: 2.7 mL = 108 mg of articaine plus 27 mug (A100) or 13.5 mug (A200) of epinephrine. The 2 solutions provided similar duration of postoperative analgesia regardless of bone removal (around 200 minutes; P > .05). The 2 solutions also had a similar duration of anesthetic action on soft tissues (around 250 minutes; P > .05). The surgeon's rating of intraoperative bleeding was considered very close to minimal. Transient changes in hemodynamic parameters were observed, but these were neither clinically significant nor attributable to the type of anesthetic used (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: An epinephrine concentration of 1:100,000 or 1:200,000 in 4% articaine solution does not affect the clinical efficacy of this local anesthetic. It is possible to successfully use the 4% articaine formulation with a lower concentration of epinephrine (1:200,000 or 5 mug/mL) for lower third molar extraction with or without bone removal.

Articaine and mepivacaine efficacy in postoperative analgesia for lower third molar removal: a double-blind, randomized, crossover study.

OBJECTIVE: Comparison of the clinical efficacy of 4% articaine in relation to 2% mepivacaine, both with 1:100,000 epinephrine, in the prevention of postoperative pain after lower third molar removal. STUDY DESIGN: Twenty patients underwent removal of bilateral lower third molars under local anesthesia (articaine or mepivacaine) in 2 separate appointments, in a double-blind, randomized, and crossed manner. Objective and subjective parameters were recorded for paired comparison of postoperative courses. RESULTS: Duration of analgesia provided by articaine and mepivacaine was 198.00 +/- 25.86, and 125.40 +/- 13.96 min, respectively (P = .02), whereas the duration of anesthesia was 273.80 +/- 15.94 and 216.85 +/- 20.15 min, respectively (P = .06). Both solutions exerted no important effects upon arterial pressure, heart rate, or oxygen saturation (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Articaine provides a longer period of analgesic effect and a tendency for a longer period of anesthesia as compared to mepivacaine. The presence of a vasoconstrictor agent in local anesthetic solutions does not seem to influence hemodynamic parameters during lower third molar removal in healthy subjects.