Cargando…

Comparative Analysis of Different Local Anesthetic Solutions Available in Market: An In Vitro and Clinical Study

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate and compare various commercially available local anesthetic solutions. Materials and Methods A total of 150 commercially available local anesthetic cartridges of similar composition (2% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:100,000) were randomly collected and divided...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Imran, Eisha, Moeen, Faisal, Abbas, Beenish, Yaqoob, Bakhtawar, Wajahat, Mehreen, Khan, Quratulain, Khurshid, Zohaib
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2021
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8630971/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34041728
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1727553
_version_ 1784607467774148608
author Imran, Eisha
Moeen, Faisal
Abbas, Beenish
Yaqoob, Bakhtawar
Wajahat, Mehreen
Khan, Quratulain
Khurshid, Zohaib
author_facet Imran, Eisha
Moeen, Faisal
Abbas, Beenish
Yaqoob, Bakhtawar
Wajahat, Mehreen
Khan, Quratulain
Khurshid, Zohaib
author_sort Imran, Eisha
collection PubMed
description Objectives This study aimed to evaluate and compare various commercially available local anesthetic solutions. Materials and Methods A total of 150 commercially available local anesthetic cartridges of similar composition (2% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:100,000) were randomly collected and divided into 3 groups. The designations of groups were selected from their product names such that each group consisted of 60 cartridges. Group S (Septodont, France) Group M (Medicaine, Korea) and Group H (HD-Caine, Pakistan). The samples were divided into five sub-groups, each consisting of 10 cartridges from each group to investigate each parameter. Results The acquired data was statistically analyzed and compared (using SPSS version 12). Compositional analysis revealed a non-significant (P>0.05) difference when the three Groups were compared with standard lidocaine and epinephrine solutions. The mean pH values of samples from group S, M, and H respectively fell within the range of pH values of commercially available solutions. Non-significant difference in EPT values of Group S and H was found when efficacy was compared ( p = 0.3), however a significant difference ( p < 0.01) was observed in contrast to Group M. Anti-bacterial activity was observed in all the group and a non-significant difference in cell viability values of Group S and M was found ( p = 0.6), while the difference was significant in comparison to Group H. Conclusion Within the limitations of these investigations, it appears that the properties of different manufacturers fall within the recommended ranges as mentioned in literature and do not appear to be statistically different in the variables we have tested.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8630971
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86309712021-12-02 Comparative Analysis of Different Local Anesthetic Solutions Available in Market: An In Vitro and Clinical Study Imran, Eisha Moeen, Faisal Abbas, Beenish Yaqoob, Bakhtawar Wajahat, Mehreen Khan, Quratulain Khurshid, Zohaib Eur J Dent Objectives This study aimed to evaluate and compare various commercially available local anesthetic solutions. Materials and Methods A total of 150 commercially available local anesthetic cartridges of similar composition (2% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:100,000) were randomly collected and divided into 3 groups. The designations of groups were selected from their product names such that each group consisted of 60 cartridges. Group S (Septodont, France) Group M (Medicaine, Korea) and Group H (HD-Caine, Pakistan). The samples were divided into five sub-groups, each consisting of 10 cartridges from each group to investigate each parameter. Results The acquired data was statistically analyzed and compared (using SPSS version 12). Compositional analysis revealed a non-significant (P>0.05) difference when the three Groups were compared with standard lidocaine and epinephrine solutions. The mean pH values of samples from group S, M, and H respectively fell within the range of pH values of commercially available solutions. Non-significant difference in EPT values of Group S and H was found when efficacy was compared ( p = 0.3), however a significant difference ( p < 0.01) was observed in contrast to Group M. Anti-bacterial activity was observed in all the group and a non-significant difference in cell viability values of Group S and M was found ( p = 0.6), while the difference was significant in comparison to Group H. Conclusion Within the limitations of these investigations, it appears that the properties of different manufacturers fall within the recommended ranges as mentioned in literature and do not appear to be statistically different in the variables we have tested. Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2021-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8630971/ /pubmed/34041728 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1727553 Text en European Journal of Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Imran, Eisha
Moeen, Faisal
Abbas, Beenish
Yaqoob, Bakhtawar
Wajahat, Mehreen
Khan, Quratulain
Khurshid, Zohaib
Comparative Analysis of Different Local Anesthetic Solutions Available in Market: An In Vitro and Clinical Study
title Comparative Analysis of Different Local Anesthetic Solutions Available in Market: An In Vitro and Clinical Study
title_full Comparative Analysis of Different Local Anesthetic Solutions Available in Market: An In Vitro and Clinical Study
title_fullStr Comparative Analysis of Different Local Anesthetic Solutions Available in Market: An In Vitro and Clinical Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Analysis of Different Local Anesthetic Solutions Available in Market: An In Vitro and Clinical Study
title_short Comparative Analysis of Different Local Anesthetic Solutions Available in Market: An In Vitro and Clinical Study
title_sort comparative analysis of different local anesthetic solutions available in market: an in vitro and clinical study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8630971/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34041728
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1727553
work_keys_str_mv AT imraneisha comparativeanalysisofdifferentlocalanestheticsolutionsavailableinmarketaninvitroandclinicalstudy
AT moeenfaisal comparativeanalysisofdifferentlocalanestheticsolutionsavailableinmarketaninvitroandclinicalstudy
AT abbasbeenish comparativeanalysisofdifferentlocalanestheticsolutionsavailableinmarketaninvitroandclinicalstudy
AT yaqoobbakhtawar comparativeanalysisofdifferentlocalanestheticsolutionsavailableinmarketaninvitroandclinicalstudy
AT wajahatmehreen comparativeanalysisofdifferentlocalanestheticsolutionsavailableinmarketaninvitroandclinicalstudy
AT khanquratulain comparativeanalysisofdifferentlocalanestheticsolutionsavailableinmarketaninvitroandclinicalstudy
AT khurshidzohaib comparativeanalysisofdifferentlocalanestheticsolutionsavailableinmarketaninvitroandclinicalstudy