ANESTHETIC EFFICACY OF 4% ARTPHARMADENT VERSUS 2% MEPECAINE-L FOR INFILTRATION ANESTHESIA IN EXTRACTION OF BADLY DECAYED LOWER FIRST PRIMARY MOLARS: A PILOT STUDY

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Former internal resident, Pediatric Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, MSc Degree Candidate, Pediatric Dentistry and Dental Public Health Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University.

2 Associate Professor in Pediatric Dentistry and Dental Public Health Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University

3 Lecturer in Pediatric Dentistry and Dental Public Health Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University

Abstract

Aim: The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of 4% Artpharmadent anesthetic solution compared to 2% Mepecaine-L anesthetic solution in extraction of badly decayed mandibular first primary molar for infiltration in children aged from 6 to 8 years.
Methodology: Twenty children with 20 badly decayed mandibular first primary molars indicated for extraction divided randomly into two equal groups (n= 10), group A received 4% Artpharmadent and group B received 2% Mepecaine-L anesthetic solution for infiltration. Intra-operative pain, the need for supplemental injection during extraction, adverse effects following the anesthetic injection, and the clinical success of the treatment were evaluated for both groups.
Results: Both groups showed nearly similar results regarding intraoperative pain using Wong-Baker Face Pain Scale (WBFPS), and Sound, eyes, and motor (SEM) scale, regarding the need for supplemental injection during the extraction, and the adverse effects following the anesthetic injection (non-significant difference statistically).
Conclusions: Both the 4% Artpharmadent and 2% Mepecaine-L are equally effective in controlling intraoperative pain during the extraction of mandibular molars and both are safe when used in children.

Keywords