Comparison of the Effects of Articaine and Lidocaine Anesthetics on Blood Pressure after Maxillary Infiltration Technique: A Triple-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

Background. Many dental procedures begin with local anesthesia. Subsequent increase in blood pressure in healthy individuals commonly occurs and may be affected by several factors such as mental and physical stress, painful stimuli, and action of catecholamines present in local anesthetic solutions. The aim of the present study is to compare the effects of 4% articaine with 1 : 100000 epinephrine and 2% lidocaine with 1 : 80000 epinephrine on blood pressure after maxillary infiltration technique. Materials and Methods. In this randomized clinical trial, 102 patients were randomly assigned into two groups. One group received 4% articaine with 1 : 100000 epinephrine and the other group received 2% lidocaine with 1 : 80000 epinephrine for local maxillary infiltration. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure of both groups was determined twice: once before anesthetic injection and once 10 minutes after injection. The data were statistically analyzed using descriptive statistics, Shapiro–Wilks test, Levene test, chi-square test, independent t-test, and paired t-test. Results. The mean systolic blood pressure after anesthetic injection in the articaine and lidocaine groups was 125.00 ± 5.67 and 123.16 ± 6.417 mmHg, respectively, showing no statistically significant difference ( p = 0.127 ). The mean diastolic blood pressure after injection was 85.02 ± 7.331 in the articaine group and 81.35 ± 12.815 mmHg in the lidocaine group. These values show no statistically significant difference ( p = 0.080 ). In both groups, the mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures have increased significantly ( p < 0.001 ). Conclusion. Articaine can be regarded as a suitable alternative for lidocaine for maxillary local infiltration, as no significant difference was observed between the effects of the two anesthetic solutions on blood pressure.

Does a New Modification of the Two-Step Injection Technique for Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Reduce Pain Compared to the Conventional Technique? A Randomized Clinical Trial

“…The results of this study also showed that none of the vital signs showed significant differences in the two groups of conventional and two-step injection techniques. Moaddabi et al [39] showed that blood pressure increased after lidocaine injection; the results of this study demonstrated that this injection did not cause significant differences in participants' vital signs. However, because no study has examined the vital signs before and after injection of conventional and two-step injection techniques, it is not possible to compare this finding with other studies.…”

The potential of articaine as new generation of local anesthesia in dental clinics: A review

“…however, there was no significant difference between the two drugs in increasing blood pressure. [51] Studies have shown that articaine is safe and reliable and can be used as a substitute for lidocaine in local infiltration anesthesia. Articaine has the shortest metabolic half-life, and high-dose injections can be used to significantly reduce post-implantation reactions.…”

A Prospective Clinical Study Evaluating the Efficacy of Intra-Ligamentary Anesthetic Solutions in Mandibular Molars Diagnosed as Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis with Symptomatic Apical Periodontitis

“…Most of the commonly used dental anesthetics include 2% lidocaine and 4% articaine [ 3 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Although considerable evidence supports the safety and efficacy, mixed results also prevail, necessitating multicentric studies globally [ 24 , 25 , 26 ].…”

“…Most of the commonly used dental anesthetics include 2% lidocaine and 4% articaine [ 3 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Although considerable evidence supports the safety and efficacy, mixed results also prevail, necessitating multicentric studies globally [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. None of the anesthetic methods/drugs resulted in obtaining foreseeable and plausible anesthesia for endodontic procedures in symptomatic pulpitis patients, necessitating the need for reliable techniques and drug combinations among dental practitioners [ 27 ].…”