Cargando…

Efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the performance of 4% Articaine vs. 2% Lidocaine for mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis (IP). METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controll...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Miglani, Sanjay, Ansari, Irfan, Patro, Swadheena, Mohanty, Ankita, Mansoori, Shahnaz, Ahuja, Bhoomika, Karobari, Mohmed Isaqali, Shetty, Krishna Prasad, Saeed, Musab Hamed, Luke, Alexander Maniangat, Pawar, Ajinkya M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475541/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34631321
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12214
_version_ 1784575439047491584
author Miglani, Sanjay
Ansari, Irfan
Patro, Swadheena
Mohanty, Ankita
Mansoori, Shahnaz
Ahuja, Bhoomika
Karobari, Mohmed Isaqali
Shetty, Krishna Prasad
Saeed, Musab Hamed
Luke, Alexander Maniangat
Pawar, Ajinkya M.
author_facet Miglani, Sanjay
Ansari, Irfan
Patro, Swadheena
Mohanty, Ankita
Mansoori, Shahnaz
Ahuja, Bhoomika
Karobari, Mohmed Isaqali
Shetty, Krishna Prasad
Saeed, Musab Hamed
Luke, Alexander Maniangat
Pawar, Ajinkya M.
author_sort Miglani, Sanjay
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the performance of 4% Articaine vs. 2% Lidocaine for mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis (IP). METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Open Gray were used to conduct a thorough literature search. A manual search of the reference lists of the publications found was also carried out. Two reviewers critically evaluated the papers for inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data extraction was done on the selected publications. The Cochrane Collaboration Tool and the Minors checklist were used to assess the quality of the selected studies for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies, respectively. The RevMan software was used to perform a meta-analysis of the pooled data and subgroups according to the technique of anaesthetic solution delivery, as well as a sensitivity analysis (P < 0.05). RESULTS: A total of twenty-six papers were included in the qualitative synthesis, with twenty-two of them being included in the meta-analysis. There were fifteen studies with a low potential for bias, three with a moderate potential for bias, and seven with a high potential for bias. The combined results of the 19 trials in the tooth level unit revealed that 4% articaine had a success rate 1.37 times greater than 2% lidocaine for mandibular teeth (RR, 1.37; 95% CI [1.17–1.62]; P = 0.0002). For the maxillary buccal infiltration method, the combined results from the three trials revealed that 4% articaine resulted in a success rate 1.06 times greater than 2% lidocaine (RR, 1.06; 95% CI [0.95–1.2]; P = 0.3). Excluding subgroups with a single study in sensitivity analysis for mandibular teeth revealed a substantial improvement in the success rate of the articaine group in treating IP when compared to the lidocaine group. CONCLUSION: The findings of this meta-analysis back up the claim that articaine is more effective than lidocaine in providing anaesthesia in patients with IP. PROSPERO Registration No.: CRD42020204606 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020204606).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8475541
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84755412021-10-08 Efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis Miglani, Sanjay Ansari, Irfan Patro, Swadheena Mohanty, Ankita Mansoori, Shahnaz Ahuja, Bhoomika Karobari, Mohmed Isaqali Shetty, Krishna Prasad Saeed, Musab Hamed Luke, Alexander Maniangat Pawar, Ajinkya M. PeerJ Dentistry OBJECTIVE: The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the performance of 4% Articaine vs. 2% Lidocaine for mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis (IP). METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Open Gray were used to conduct a thorough literature search. A manual search of the reference lists of the publications found was also carried out. Two reviewers critically evaluated the papers for inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data extraction was done on the selected publications. The Cochrane Collaboration Tool and the Minors checklist were used to assess the quality of the selected studies for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies, respectively. The RevMan software was used to perform a meta-analysis of the pooled data and subgroups according to the technique of anaesthetic solution delivery, as well as a sensitivity analysis (P < 0.05). RESULTS: A total of twenty-six papers were included in the qualitative synthesis, with twenty-two of them being included in the meta-analysis. There were fifteen studies with a low potential for bias, three with a moderate potential for bias, and seven with a high potential for bias. The combined results of the 19 trials in the tooth level unit revealed that 4% articaine had a success rate 1.37 times greater than 2% lidocaine for mandibular teeth (RR, 1.37; 95% CI [1.17–1.62]; P = 0.0002). For the maxillary buccal infiltration method, the combined results from the three trials revealed that 4% articaine resulted in a success rate 1.06 times greater than 2% lidocaine (RR, 1.06; 95% CI [0.95–1.2]; P = 0.3). Excluding subgroups with a single study in sensitivity analysis for mandibular teeth revealed a substantial improvement in the success rate of the articaine group in treating IP when compared to the lidocaine group. CONCLUSION: The findings of this meta-analysis back up the claim that articaine is more effective than lidocaine in providing anaesthesia in patients with IP. PROSPERO Registration No.: CRD42020204606 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020204606). PeerJ Inc. 2021-09-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8475541/ /pubmed/34631321 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12214 Text en ©2021 Miglani et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Dentistry
Miglani, Sanjay
Ansari, Irfan
Patro, Swadheena
Mohanty, Ankita
Mansoori, Shahnaz
Ahuja, Bhoomika
Karobari, Mohmed Isaqali
Shetty, Krishna Prasad
Saeed, Musab Hamed
Luke, Alexander Maniangat
Pawar, Ajinkya M.
Efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort efficacy of 4% articaine vs 2% lidocaine in mandibular and maxillary block and infiltration anaesthesia in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Dentistry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475541/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34631321
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12214
work_keys_str_mv AT miglanisanjay efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ansariirfan efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT patroswadheena efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mohantyankita efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mansoorishahnaz efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ahujabhoomika efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT karobarimohmedisaqali efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT shettykrishnaprasad efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT saeedmusabhamed efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lukealexandermaniangat efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pawarajinkyam efficacyof4articainevs2lidocaineinmandibularandmaxillaryblockandinfiltrationanaesthesiainpatientswithirreversiblepulpitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis