Comparison of Anesthetic Efficacy OF 2% Lidocaine Inferior Alveolar Nerve (IANB) Block Versus Primary Buccal Infilteration With 4% Articaine in Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis(SIP) IN Mandibular First Molars (IANB SIP EPT)

February 7, 2026 updated by: Sadia Shehzadi, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Pakistan
This randomized controlled trial aims to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 2% lignocaine administered through an inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in one group of participants with 4% articaine delivered via primary buccal infiltration in other group in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular first molars.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

This single-blinded randomized controlled trial evaluates the comparative anesthetic efficacy of two routinely used local anesthetic techniques for mandibular first molars diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. Inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) using 2% lidocaine is a standard but technique-sensitive approach with reported failure rates of 20-25%, often influenced by anatomical variations and pulpal inflammation. Primary buccal infiltration with 4% articaine has emerged as a promising alternative due to superior bone penetration and favorable clinical outcomes in several studies, though evidence in adult South Asian populations remains limited.

A total of 330 systemically healthy adults (ASA I, aged 18-55 years) meeting strict diagnostic criteria for symptomatic irreversible pulpitis will be enrolled. Participants will be randomized into two groups:

  • Group 1: 2% lidocaine (1:80,000 epinephrine) via IANB
  • Group 2: 4% articaine (1:100,000 epinephrine) via primary buccal infiltration

All injections will be standardized to 1.8 mL delivered over 60 seconds using 27-gauge needles by a single experienced clinician. Topical anesthesia with benzocaine 20% will be used prior to injection. Dental anxiety will be screened using Corah's DAS, and patients with high or phobic anxiety scores will be excluded.

Fifteen minutes after administration, soft-tissue anesthesia will be confirmed (lip numbness for IANB and buccal probe response for infiltration). Pulpal anesthesia will be objectively assessed using an electric pulp tester (EPT) and subjectively using the Heft-Parker Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at multiple treatment stages: baseline, post-injection, access preparation, pulp chamber entry, and root canal instrumentation.

Anesthetic success will be defined as:

  • Two consecutive non-responsive EPT readings (max output 80)
  • Mild or no pain during the procedure (VAS <55 mm)

Failure will be recorded if moderate/severe pain (VAS ≥55 mm) occurs at any stage or supplemental anesthesia is required.

The study aims to determine whether 4% articaine buccal infiltration can provide anesthetic efficacy equal to or superior to 2% lidocaine IANB for endodontic treatment of symptomatic mandibular first molars. The findings may help refine local anesthetic protocols and reduce the need for supplemental injections in challenging pulpal conditions.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

330

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

    • Punjab Province
      • Rawalpindi, Punjab Province, Pakistan, 46000

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Systemically healthy patients classified as ASA I, aged 18-55 years.
  • Permanent mandibular first molar tooth requiring endodontic therapy.
  • Diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis without swelling or sinus.
  • Normal periapical radiographic appearance (no evidence of periapical pathology).
  • Moderate pain as assessed by the Heft-Parker VAS (>54 mm and <114 mm).
  • Lingering pain or prolonged response to cold testing (lasting more than 10 seconds).
  • Positive response to electric pulp testing.
  • Outcome assessed must be pulpal anesthesia

Exclusion Criteria:

  • • Pregnant or lactating mothers.

    • Teeth with reversible pulpitis, previously treated, or with calcified canals.
    • Teeth with severe periodontal disease or periapical radiolucency.
    • Patients who have taken analgesics or anti-inflammatory drugs within 6 hours before the treatment visit.
    • Patients on medications that could potentially interact with the anesthetic solution (e.g., antihypertensives, anticoagulants).
    • History of allergy to 4% articaine, lidocaine, or epinephrine.
    • Systemic diseases, immunocompromised states, or significant anxiety/mental health disorders.
    • History of vasovagal syncope on local anesthetic administration

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: ARM 1 : 2%Lignocaine 1:80,000 epinephrine
: 2% Lignocaine Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block (IANB) Participants in this group will receive an inferior alveolar nerve block using 2% Lignocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine.
2% Lignocaine Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block (IANB) : Participants in this group will receive an inferior alveolar nerve block using 2% Lignocaine with 1:80,000 epinephrine. The injection will be administered following standard IANB technique for mandibular first molars. The anesthetic efficacy will be assessed with 2 consecutive non responsive readings on EPT objectivelt and via Heft-Parker VAS not more than ≥55 .
Active Comparator: ARM 2 : 4% Articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine
Participants in this group will receive 4% Articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine at the site of the mandibular first molar.
Participants in this group will receive a buccal infiltration of 4% Articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine at the site of the mandibular first molar. The injection will follow standard buccal infiltration technique. Anesthetic efficacy will be evaluated during endodontic treatment using the same pain assessment method as Arm 1.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Anesthetic efficacy
Time Frame: 1 hour after administration of anesthetic agent

Description: Patients will be assigned to one of the two groups . Group 1: 2%Lignocaine 1;80,000 epinephrine 1.8 ml IANB Group 2: 4%Articaine 1:100,000 epinephrine 1.8 ml Primary buccal infilteration Efficacy will be considered if there are 2 consecutive non-responsive readings during 60 mins duration , usually measured on EPT 15 mins after administration of anesthesia . Any pain felt during the procedure will be measured according to Heft-Parker VAS and moderate-severe pain reported (VAS ≥ 55) will be regarded unsuccessful .

Time Frame: 1 hour after administration of local anesthetic agent .

1 hour after administration of anesthetic agent

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Duration of anesthesia
Time Frame: 1 hour 30 mins

Description: Duration up to which Lignocaine IANB/Articaine Primary Buccal Infilteration remains successful after administration .

Time Frame: 1 hour 30 mins

1 hour 30 mins

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

February 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

August 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

February 1, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 7, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 7, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

February 13, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

February 13, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 7, 2026

Last Verified

January 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

IPD will not be shared because the study does not include plans or infrastructure for secure long term data storage, de-identification, and controlled access needed to protect participants privacy .Additionally, the data sheet is small and disclosure may include the risk of re-identification, summary results will be made available as required.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Anesthetic Efficacy

Clinical Trials on INTERVENTION 1: 2% Lignocaine 1:80,000 epinephrine

Subscribe