Comparison of 4% Articaine Versus 2% Lidocaine for Tooth Extraction of Mandibular Molars
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22452/adum.vol33.4Keywords:
Articaine, lidocaine, tooth extraction, molar, KabulAbstract
Teeth extraction requires a painless procedure with minimal dosage and needle insertions. Articaine possesses unique chemical structure incorporating a thiophene moiety, which augments its lipophilicity, and an ester group that is conducive to plasma biotransformation. This study was conducted to compare efficacy of 4% articaine and 2% lidocaine for extraction of mandibular molars at Stomatology Teaching Hospital, Kabul. This prospective cohort study included 60 patients (30 in each group) who were referred for extraction of lower molar teeth. Data were collected using pre-structured checklist and analyzed using SPSS version 21.0. Independent t-test was used to compare onset and duration of anesthesia, statistical significance set at p<0.05. Most of the participants (65%) were male, with mean age of 34.81±12.12 years. Onset of anesthesia in patients administered with articaine was on average 97 sec, whereas in lidocaine-administered patients it was 158.5 sec (p < 0.001). Duration of anesthesia in articaine administered group (236.4 min) was significantly longer than in lidocaine administered group (164.4 min) (p < 0.001). Onset of anesthesia with articaine was faster than with lidocaine, and duration of anesthesia with articaine was longer than with lidocaine. Therefore, articaine is recommended for the extraction of mandibular molars.
References
1. Lim KH, Salahudin MS, Hariri F. Evaluating full cup study, numeric pain rating scale, and visual analogue scale in assessing pain after surgical removal of lower third molar. Annals of Dentistry University of Malaya. 2017;24(2):16-23.
2. Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. A comparison between articaine HCl and lidocaine HCl in pediatric dental patients. Pediatr Dent. 2000;22(4):307-11.
3. Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. Articaine hydrochloride: a study of the safety of a new amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc. 2001;132(2):177-85.
4. Vree TB, Baars AM, van Oss GE, Booij LH. High-performance liquid chromatography and preliminary pharmacokinetics of articaine and its 2-carboxy metabolite in human serum and urine. J Chromatogr. 1988;424(2):440-4.
5. Malamed SF, Gagnon S, Leblanc D. Efficacy of articaine: a new amide local anesthetic. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000;131(5):635-42.
6. Nogueira EC, Almeida RA, de Souza BL, Aguiar PL, Vasconcellos RH. Why choose articaine over lidocaine for the removal of third molars? Systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Exp Dent. 2023;15(11):e963-e77.
7. Thomas AM, George S, Anandaraj S. Anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lignocaine in root canal treatment of teeth with molar incisor hypomineralization. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2023;41(4):316-21.
8. Haidar M, Raslan N. Comparative study of articaine 4% versus lidocaine 2% in the local anesthesia of permanent mandibular first molars affected by MIH: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2023;24(5):621-30.
9. Joshi A, Soni HK. Efficacy of Infiltration Anesthesia of 4% Articaine HCl (buccal) Versus 2% Lignocaine HCl (buccolingual) in Extraction of Mandibular Premolars: A Single Centred, Randomised, Crossover Group Study. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2020;19(3):431-7.
10. Gholami M, Banihashemrad A, Mohammadzadeh A, Ahrari F. The Efficacy of 4% Articaine Versus 2% Lidocaine in Inducing Palatal Anesthesia for Tooth Extraction in Different Maxillary Regions. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;79(8):1643-9.
11. Jain K, Katge F, Chimata VK, Patil D, Ghadge S, Bhanushali N. Comparative evaluation of anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine infiltration versus 2% lignocaine inferior alveolar nerve block for extraction of primary mandibular molars: A prospective, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2021;39(4):409-15.
12. Sierra Rebolledo A, Delgado Molina E, Berini Aytís L, Gay Escoda C. Comparative study of the anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine in inferior alveolar nerve block during surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2007;12(2):E139-44.
13. Chen HS, Hsu KJ, Chen PJ, Lee HN, Chen JH, Chen CM. Investigating the relation among the needle insertion plane, occlusal plane, mandibular foramen, and mandibular lingula for inferior alveolar nerve block. J Dent Sci. 2025;20(3):1792-801.
14. Yang F, Gao Y, Zhang L, Zheng B, Wang L, Sun H, et al. Local anesthesia for surgical extraction of mandibular third molars: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2020;24(11):3781-800.
15. Hassan S, Rao BH, Sequeria J, Rai G. Efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride and 2% lignocaine hydrochloride in the extraction of maxillary premolars for orthodontic reasons. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2011;1(1):14-8.
16. Jain NK, John RR. Anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lignocaine during the surgical removal of the third molar: A comparative prospective study. Anesth Essays Res. 2016;10(2):356-61.
17. Kambalimath DH, Dolas RS, Kambalimath HV, Agrawal SM. Efficacy of 4 % Articaine and 2 % Lidocaine: A clinical study. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2013;12(1):3-10.
18. Martínez-Rodríguez N, Barona-Dorado C, Martín-Arés M, Cortés-Bretón-Brinkman J, Martínez-González JM. Evaluation of theanestheticproperties and tolerance of 1:100,000 articaine versus 1:100,000 lidocaine. A comparative study in surgery of the lower third molar. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012;17(2):e345-51.
19. Silva LC, Santos TD, Santos JA, Maia MC, Mendonça CG. Articaine versus lidocaine for third molar surgery: a randomized clinical study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012;17(1):e140-5.
20. Tortamano IP, Siviero M, Costa CG, Buscariolo IA, Armonia PL. A comparison of the anesthetic efficacy of articaine and lidocaine in patients with irreversible pulpitis. J Endod. 2009;35(2):165-8.
21. Boonsiriseth K, Chaimanakarn S, Chewpreecha P, Nonpassopon N, Khanijou M, Ping B, et al. 4% lidocaine versus 4% articaine for inferior alveolar nerve block in impacted lower third molar surgery. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2017;17(1):29-35.
22. Nagendrababu V, Duncan HF, Whitworth J, Nekoofar MH, Pulikkotil SJ, Veettil SK, et al. Is articaine more effective than lidocaine in patients with irreversible pulpitis? An umbrella review. Int Endod J. 2020;53(2):200-13.
23. Su N, Li C, Wang H, Shen J, Liu W, Kou L. Efficacy and safety of articaine versus lidocaine for irreversible pulpitis treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Aust Endod J. 2016;42(1):4-15.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Annals of Dentistry University of Malaya
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- The Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya holds the copyright of the published manuscript including all its components such as supplementary information, graphical contents and raw data without any restrictions.
- The author grant the Faculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya assignable and sub-licensable right, unlimited in time and territory, to copy-edit, reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, make available and store the Article, including abstracts thereof, in all forms of media of expression now known or developed in the future, including pre- and reprints, translations, photographic reproductions and extensions.
- After acceptance for publication in Ann Dent UM, the author(s) have the right to use any of its components in whole or in part for academic purposes such as, presentation in scientific conferences and seminars.
