rticaine and Lidocaine Mandibular Buccal Infiltration nesthesia: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind ross-Over Study

b o m o B e c t e bstract his randomized crossover double-blind trial compared he efficacy of buccal infiltration with 4% articaine and % lidocaine (both with 1:100,000 epinephrine) in ecuring mandibular first molar pulp anesthesia. Injecions were given at least 1 week apart in 31 healthy dult volunteers. Electronic pulp testing was underaken at baseline and at 2 minute intervals until 30 inutes postinjection. A successful outcome was reorded in the absence of pulp sensation on two conecutive maximal pulp tester stimulations (80 A). 4.5% of articaine and 38.7% of lidocaine infiltrations ere successful (p 0.008). Articaine infiltration prouced significantly more episodes of no response to aximum stimulation in first molars than lidocaine 236 and 129, respectively, p 0.001). Mandibular uccal infiltration is more effective with 4% articaine ith epinephrine compared to 2% lidocaine with epiephrine. Both injections were associated with mild iscomfort. (J Endod 2006;32:296–298)