Primary study · included by 1 review
Articaine versus Lidocaine in only buccal infiltration anesthesia for the extraction of mandibular anterior teeth. A prospective split-mouth randomized-controlled clinical study.
Al-Mahalawy 2023 · Al-Mahalawy Haytham, El-Mahallawy Yehia, Abdelrahman Hams H, et al. · BMC oral health · 2023
Included by
| Outcome this study informs | Pooled effect | Evidence | Certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Pain intensity (VAS) 4% articaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia vs 2% lidocaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia | MD -2.6 [-5.07, -0.12] | 4 studies | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity (VAS) 4% articaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia vs 2% lidocaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia | MD -3.16 [-6.09, -0.23] | 7 studies | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity (VAS) 4% articaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia vs 2% lidocaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia | MD -2.38 [-3.43, -1.33] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity (VAS) 4% articaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia vs 2% lidocaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia | MD -0.95 [-7.73, 5.84] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity (VAS) 4% articaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia vs 2% lidocaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia | MD -4.41 [-7.62, -1.21] | 7 studies · 418 participants | Moderate |
Pain intensity (VAS) 4% articaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia vs 2% lidocaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia | MD -5.2 [-8.01, -2.38] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Pain intensity (VAS) 4% articaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia vs 2% lidocaine with epinephrine, infiltration anesthesia | MD -8.72 [-16.04, -1.4] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
1 including review in total.