RESUMO
AIM: Articaine and bupivacaine are both amide-type local anesthetic (LA) agents, of almost equal potency. However, lidocaine is considered the gold standard and is the most widely used anesthetic agent because of its potency, safety, and efficiency. Articaine is fast acting and bupivacaine is a long-lasting LA. The aim of this randomized controlled crossover clinical study was to evaluate and compare the clinical anesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine and 0.5% bupivacaine in orthodontic extractions models. METHODS: Forty systemically healthy patients (age range: 10-18 years), requiring premolar extraction for orthodontic reasons (all 4 premolars) were included. Patients were categorized into two groups (4% articaine and 0.5% bupivacaine) in a crossover manner (160 premolars). Parameters recorded included: time of anesthetic onset, duration of postoperative analgesia, time to first rescue analgesic medication, and visual analog scale (VAS). At the first appointment, both upper and lower premolars were extracted on one side of the jaws (right or left). A fixed volume of 1.4 mL of 4% articaine or 0.5% bupivacaine (based on a computer-generated list) was infiltrated in the buccal vestibule (local infiltration) for extraction. At the second appointment, after a washout period of 15 days, the anesthetic agent that was not administered at the first appointment was administered in a crossover manner. Each patient was evaluated using a 100-mm VAS during and after extraction. RESULTS: The results showed that 4% articaine had significantly faster onset of action and lower VAS scores when compared with bupivacaine. However, the duration of analgesia and time to first rescue analgesic medication was longer in the bupivacaine group. CONCLUSION: Articaine seemed to have better potency and efficacy in terms of onset of action and lower pain scores compared to the bupivacaine group. Further studies are required to confirm these results.
