A Comparsion Between Articaine Hydrochloride and Buffered Lidocaine Hydrochloride in the Context of Maxillary Permanent Teeth Extraction Using the Buccal Infiltration Technique Only(Clinical Study).

NCT07597408 | Active Not Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: Tishreen-U O,M Facial surgery
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 50
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

palatal anesthesia remains one of the greatest fears of patients as well as being painful for the patient and bothersome for the dentist .Research is still ongoing to find the best anesthetic agent that achieves the highest success rate of anesthesia and pain control without the need for palatal injection. 2% Lidocaine with sodium bicarbonate the best agent that can achieve the highest success rate across all criteria when using the buccal infiltration technique without the need for palatal anesthesia? The importance of this research lies in finding the best agent that may eliminate the need for painful and annoying palatal injection, therapy alleviating many patient fears, achieving greater patient cooperation during dental procedures in the maxilla, and avoiding multiple palatal anesthesia failures. This research aim to compare the anesthetic efficacy between 4% Articaine and 2% Lidocaine with sodium bicarbonate using the buccal infiltration technique without palatal anesthesia in the context of permanent maxillary first molar extraction, in terms of:

• Symmetrical anxiety in patients will be divided into two sessions, preferably at least one week apart.
• Before anesthesia, the heft-parker visual analog scale will be presented, and the patient will be taught how to choose the independent value according to degree of pain or discomfort they experience. .In the first session, one of the two teeth will be selected using examples of intracanal reamers with internal engagement. The actual times corresponding to the internal statements of the slowly managed staff should be recorded without changing the lack of search. Then, time is calculated from the completion of the anesthetic solution deposition until the depth of anesthesia is confirmed using a sharp instrument with slight pressure at the tooth junction from the palatal side. The depth of anesthesia is assessed using the VAS project then the extraction is done. If sufficient anesthetic depth is not achieved for each tooth, a palatal approach is added, and the case is considered excessive. In the second session, 0.2 ml of mepivacaine is emptied and replace with 0.2ml of sodium bicarbonate. The dose is selected according to the depth of internal statements corresponding to the tooth to be treated. In the case of a normal plan, anesthesia is performed with a lack of search, and then time is calculated from the completion of the anesthetic solution deposition until the depth of anesthesia is confirmed using a sharp instrument with slight pressure at the tooth junction from the palatal side. The depth of anesthesia is assessed using the VAS project then the extraction is done. If sufficient anesthetic depth is not achieved for each tooth, a palatal approach is added, and the case considered excessive.

Conditions

A Comparsion Between Articaine Hydrochloride and Buffered Lidocaine Hydrochloride

Keywords

Articaine Hydrochloride, Lidocaine Hydrochloride, Buccal Infiltration ,Extraction ,

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)

  The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used as the main scale to express the degree of pain. Description: Studied Variables 1.Pain at two surgical sites(the two fields) 2.Onset time of anesthetic effect 3.Anesthetic efficacy (by using a sharp needle inserted into the palatal gingiva to a certain depth) 4.Duration of anesthetic action(source: E-kholey 2016)

  Time Frame: The follow-up begins from the start of anesthesia until its effect wears off after extraction. immediately after the intervention/procedure/surgery"

• The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used as the main scale to express the degree of pain.

  Studied Variables 1. Pain at two surgical sites(the two fields) 2. Onset time of anesthetic effect 3. Anesthetic efficacy (by using a sharp needle inserted into the palatal gingiva to a certain depth) 4. Duration of anesthetic action(source: E-kholey 2016)

  The follow-up begins from the start of anesthesia until its effect wears off after extraction. immediately after the intervention/procedure/surgery"

Study Arms (1)

A Comparsion Between Articaine Hydrochloride and Buffered Lidocaine Hydrochloride in the Context of

EXPERIMENTAL

Procedure: A Comparsion Between Articaine Hydrochloride and Buffered Lidocaine Hydrochloride in the Context of Maxillary Permanent Teeth Extraction Using the Buccal Infiltration Technique

Interventions

A Comparsion Between Articaine Hydrochloride and Buffered Lidocaine Hydrochloride in the Context of Maxillary Permanent Teeth Extraction Using the Buccal Infiltration Technique PROCEDURE

The study will be conducted on a sample of patients attending the anesthesia and extraction clinics at the faculty of dentistry, University of Latakia, and the minor oral surgery and dental impaction clinic at Latakia University Hospital. The sample consists of 50 patients with symmetrical upper teeth that are worn down and require extraction. Inclusion Criteria: 1. Systemically healthy patients 2. Patiens age between 18-60 years 3. Patients with no allergy to amide local anesthetics 4. Patients requiring extraction of fully erupted, permanent, single-root teeth Exclusion Criteria 1.Patients younger than 18 years 2.Patients who have taken any analgesic, sedative, antihistamine, anxiolytic, or beta-blocker medications (as the affect anesthetic efficacy assessment) 3.Patiens with sickle cell anemia 4.Patiens allergic to amid local anesthetics The material and devices used in the study include: Examination instruments: Forceps, mirror, probe. Local antiseptics: Sterile gauze- 0.12% chlo

A Comparsion Between Articaine Hydrochloride and Buffered Lidocaine Hydrochloride in the Context of

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 60 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64)

You may qualify if:

• Systemically healthy patients
• Patiens age between 18-60 years
• Patients with no allergy to amide local anesthetics

You may not qualify if:

• <!-- -->
• Patients younger than 18 years
• Patients who have taken any analgesic, sedative, antihistamine, anxiolytic, or beta-blocker medications (as the affect anesthetic efficacy assessment)
• Patients with sickle cell anemia
• Patiens allergic to amid local anesthetics

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Tishreen University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Latakia university

Latakia, Syria

Location

Study Officials

• Ahmad Ahmad, Professor

  lattakia university

  STUDY CHAIR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: NA
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: SINGLE GROUP
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: April 27, 2026
• First Posted: May 19, 2026
• Study Start: July 15, 2025
• Primary Completion (Estimated): February 15, 2027
• Study Completion (Estimated): February 20, 2027
• Last Updated: May 19, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-04

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

SY (1)