- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT07409896
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)
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
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
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Dr. Sadia Shehzadi Dr. Sadia Shehzadi, BDS,FCPS(PG3)
- Phone Number: 03342073051
- Email: sadiashehzadi321@gmail.com
Study Locations
-
-
Punjab Province
-
Rawalpindi, Punjab Province, Pakistan, 46000
- Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry AFID CMH Rawalpindi
-
Contact:
- Sadia Shehzadi
- Email: sadiashehzadi321@gmail.com
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
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
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
Publications and helpful links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- SS-ENDO-IANBART-2025
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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
-
University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli"CompletedLocal Anesthetic EfficacyItaly
-
Boston Children's HospitalLinde AGWithdrawn
-
Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital Affiliated to...Unknown
-
The Cleveland ClinicCompleted
-
Sintetica SACross Research S.A.Completed
-
Al-Azhar UniversityCompletedLocal Anesthetic ComplicationEgypt
-
University Hospital, CaenCompletedMusic, Anesthetic, InductionFrance
-
Sichuan Haisco Pharmaceutical Group Co., LtdCompleted
-
West China HospitalRecruitingGeneral Anesthetic | ElectroencephalographicChina
-
Cairo UniversityRecruitingLocal Anesthetic ComplicationEgypt
Clinical Trials on INTERVENTION 1: 2% Lignocaine 1:80,000 epinephrine
-
Tishreen UniversityCompletedInflamed and Infected Primary Molars in Children | Effectiveness of Buffered Local Anesthesia During Dental ExtractionSyrian Arab Republic
-
Texas State UniversityKansas State University; Penn State UniversityUnknownRomantic Relationship Skills | Coparenting Skills
-
Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer CenterAmerican Cancer Society, Inc.Completed
-
Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron Research InstituteUniversity of Vienna; University of Helsinki; Aalto University; Firstbeat Technologies... and other collaboratorsCompleted
-
Queensland Centre for Gynaecological CancerThe University of Queensland; Mater Medical Research Institute; Lions Medical... and other collaboratorsRecruiting
-
Mayo ClinicActive, not recruitingCommunication | Patient SatisfactionUnited States
-
Fundacio d'Investigacio en Atencio Primaria Jordi...SanofiCompletedType 2 Diabetes MellitusSpain
-
British Columbia Cancer AgencyGenomic Health®, Inc.Not yet recruiting
-
Medical University of LodzNational Science Centre, PolandCompletedChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)Poland
-
Beijing HospitalThe First Hospital of Jilin University; Jilin University; Chinese Academy of...Not yet recruitingAsthma | Allergic Disease