Comparison of Efficacy of 4% Articaine versus Buffered 2% Lidocaine in Mandibular Third Molar Extraction: A Prospective Analytical Study

Background: This prospective study was conducted to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of two local anaesthetic solutions: 4% articaine and buffered 2% lidocaine used during mandibular third molar extractions. Materials and Methods: A total of 200 extractions were performed at Sri Aurobindo Coll...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences
Main Authors: Nikit Agrawal, Abhinav Jaiswal, Ashish Maheshwari, Tejas Motiwale, Susmitha R. Vyas
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2025-09-01
Subjects:
articaine
buffered lidocaine
pain
Online Access:https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_882_25
Description
Summary:Background: This prospective study was conducted to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of two local anaesthetic solutions: 4% articaine and buffered 2% lidocaine used during mandibular third molar extractions. Materials and Methods: A total of 200 extractions were performed at Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry, equally divided into two groups. Results and Conclusion: Buffered Lidocaine was associated with reduced pain during injection and faster onset of subjective anaesthesia, whereas Articaine provided better pain control during the procedure. Both anaesthetics showed comparable durations and no postoperative complications, indicating both are safe and effective options when used appropriately.
ISSN:0976-4879
0975-7406

Similar Items