Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The aim of the study is to compare the anesthetic efficacy and need for supplemental anesthesia of 1.8 ml compared to 3.6 ml of 4% articaine buccal infiltration in mandibular molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.
Patients with moderate-to-severe pain due to symptomatic irreversible pulpitis will be included. Patients will be randomly assigned into two groups to receive either 1.8 ml 4% articaine buccal infiltration or 3.6. ml 4% articaine buccal infiltration before single visit root canal treatments. Intraoperative pain will be assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) so that anesthetic success will be defined as no to mild intraoperative pain. The need for supplemental anesthesia will also be recorded.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.8 ml 4% articaine buccal infiltration. | Active Comparator |
| |
| 3.6 ml 4% articaine buccal infiltration | Experimental |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.6 ml 4% Articaine hydrochloride | Drug | 3.6 ml 4% articaine buccal infiltration |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Anesthetic success | Will be measured by 11-point numerical rating scale NRS. The success will be defined as no or mild pain (NRS 0 or less than 3) and the failure will be defined as moderate to severe pain (NRS more than 3). | During the procedure |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Need for supplemental anesthesia | Whether the patient requires supplemental anesthesia or not. It will be recorded by the questionnaire (yes or no). | During the procedure |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hebatullah Moheb Ibrahim | Contact | 00201114563058 | heba.eid@dentistry.cu.edu.eg |
Not provided
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22099890 | Background | Poorni S, Veniashok B, Senthilkumar AD, Indira R, Ramachandran S. Anesthetic efficacy of four percent articaine for pulpal anesthesia by using inferior alveolar nerve block and buccal infiltration techniques in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial. J Endod. 2011 Dec;37(12):1603-7. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.09.009. | |
| 26149210 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D002355 | Carticaine |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D013876 | Thiophenes |
| D013457 | Sulfur Compounds |
| D009930 | Organic Chemicals |
| D006573 | Heterocyclic Compounds, 1-Ring |
Not provided
Not provided
Parallel, randomized, clinical trial
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| 1.8 ml 4% Articaine hydrochloride | Drug | 1.8 ml 4% articaine buccal infiltration |
|
| Abazarpoor R, Parirokh M, Nakhaee N, Abbott PV. A Comparison of Different Volumes of Articaine for Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block for Molar Teeth with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis. J Endod. 2015 Sep;41(9):1408-11. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.05.015. Epub 2015 Jul 3. |
| 24702239 | Background | Monteiro MR, Groppo FC, Haiter-Neto F, Volpato MC, Almeida JF. 4% articaine buccal infiltration versus 2% lidocaine inferior alveolar nerve block for emergency root canal treatment in mandibular molars with irreversible pulpits: a randomized clinical study. Int Endod J. 2015 Feb;48(2):145-52. doi: 10.1111/iej.12293. Epub 2014 May 22. |
| D006571 |
| Heterocyclic Compounds |