Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2000 May;131(5):635-42.
doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0237.

Efficacy of articaine: a new amide local anesthetic

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Efficacy of articaine: a new amide local anesthetic

S F Malamed et al. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000 May.

Abstract

Background: The authors compared the safety and efficacy of 4 percent articaine with epinephrine 1:100,000 with 2 percent lidocaine with epinephrine 1:100,000.

Methods: In three identical randomized, double-blind, multicenter trials, subjects 4 to 80 years of age received either 4 percent articaine with epinephrine 1:100,000 or 2 percent lidocaine with epinephrine 1:100,000 for simple or complex dental procedures. In each trial, the authors randomized the subjects in a 2:1 ratio to receive articaine or lidocaine. Efficacy was determined by both subject and investigator using a visual analog scale, or VAS. The authors used the Kruskal-Wallis test to analyze the data.

Results: A total of 882 subjects received articaine, and 443 received lidocaine. The authors found no statistical differences between the groups (P = .05). They also compared drug volumes for both articaine and lidocaine groups (2.5 milliliters +/- 0.07 standard error of mean, or SEM, vs. 2.6 mL +/- 0.09 SEM for simple procedures and 4.2 mL +/- 0.15 SEM vs. 4.5 mL +/- 0.21 SEM for complex procedures). The procedures' durations were comparable for both the articaine and lidocaine groups. The authors found no statistical difference between the two treatment groups (P = .05) with respect to subject or investigator pain ratings using the VAS; the mean pain scores determined by both patients and investigators for all groups tested were less than 1.0.

Conclusions: The authors found that 4 percent articaine with epinephrine 1:100,000 was well-tolerated in 882 subjects. It also provided clinically effective pain relief during most dental procedures and had a time to onset and duration of anesthesia appropriate for clinical use and comparable to those observed for other commercially available local anesthetics.

Clinical implications: Pain control is a major component of patient comfort and safety. Local anesthetics form the backbone of pain control techniques in dentistry. Four percent articaine with epinephrine is an amide local anesthetic that will meet the clinical requirements for pain control of most dental procedures in most patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Articaine vs. lidocaine.
    Schertzer ER Jr. Schertzer ER Jr. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000 Sep;131(9):1248, 1250. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0367. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000. PMID: 10986825 No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources