CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03470532Updated Mar 21, 2018

Comparing Articaine and Mepivacaine Without Palatal Injection in Pain Assessment During Maxillary Teeth Extraction

A Phase 4 interventional study of buccal infiltration of 4% Articaine with Epinephrine and buccal infiltration of 2% Mepivacaine with Epinephrine in Pain, sponsored by Melaka Manipal Medical College. Completed at 1 site in Malaysia. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-03-21.

Sponsored by Melaka Manipal Medical College · Phase 4, Interventional, and Supportive care

Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study compares the the efficacy of buccal infiltration of 4% Articaine and 2% Mepivacaine without any palatal injection during extraction of maxillary teeth. One group of patient receives buccal infiltration of Articaine and another group receives buccal infiltration of Mepivacaine.

Read the detailed description

Dense local anesthesia is required to reduce pain during extraction of tooth. Administration of local anesthesia to the palatal mucosa is proved to be the most painful due to its firm adherence to the underlying periosteum and also it's abundant nerve supply. Articaine has greater lipid solubility and high bone penetration property. Mepivacaine is proven to be the safest local anaesthetic agent. Avoidance of a palatal injection during extraction will benefit the patient by reducing pain and anxiety to a greater extent.

So this study compares the bone penetration property between Articaine and Mepivacaine by assessing the pain in the palatal mucosa while extracting the tooth using only buccal infiltration.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pain
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients aged 18 years and above
  • Patients requiring extraction of maxillary teeth which are grossly decayed, grade I mobile, root stumps or indicated for therapeutic extractions.
  • Healthy patients ( ASA I ) or patients with mild systemic disease with no functional limitations (ASA II).
  • Patients who are not allergic to the drugs used in the study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with periapical infections.
  • Patients who are on concurrent treatment with NSAIDs and corticosteroids
04

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Investigator)
Enrollment
60 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Group A

    buccal infiltration of 4% Articaine with epinephrine

    Drug: buccal infiltration of 4% Articaine with Epinephrine

  • Active comparator
    Group B

    buccal infiltration of 2% Mepivacaine with epinephrine

    Drug: buccal infiltration of 2% Mepivacaine with Epinephrine

Interventions

  • Drugbuccal infiltration of 4% Articaine with Epinephrine

    Articaine Hydrochloride 4 % / Epinephrine 1:200,000 1.8 ML Cartridge

    Also known as: Septocaine 4%

  • Drugbuccal infiltration of 2% Mepivacaine with Epinephrine

    Mepivacaine Hydrochloride 2% Epinephrine 1:200,000 2.2 Ml Cartridge

    Also known as: Scandonest 2%

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Measurement of pain intensity

    pain intensity in the palatal mucosa is measured using Visual Analogue Scale during instrumentation to check objective symptoms of numbness. The pain is marked from 0-100 mm in a 100 mm visual analogue scale ( 0= no pain, 100= extremely severe pain).

    Time frame: 10 minutes after the administration of the drug

  2. Measurement of pain intensity

    pain intensity in the palatal mucosa is measured using Visual Analogue Scale during flap elevation procedure . The pain is marked from 0-100 mm in a 100 mm visual analogue scale ( 0= no pain, 100= extremely severe pain).

    Time frame: through the extraction procedure

  3. Measurement of pain intensity

    pain intensity is measured using Visual Analogue Scale during extraction of tooth. The pain is marked from 0-100 mm in a 100 mm visul analogue scale ( 0= no pain, 100= extremely severe pain).

    Time frame: Through the extraction procedure

Secondary outcomes

  1. Response rate

    the total number of patients with pain score more than 40 mm in visual Analogue Scale resulting in a palatal injection.

    Time frame: Through the extraction procedure

06

Study locations

1 site
  • Melaka Manipal Medical College
    Melaka, 75150, Malaysia
07

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03470532
Lead sponsor
Melaka Manipal Medical College
Responsible party
Abdul Kalam Azad (Assistant Professor, Dept Of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Melaka Manipal Medical College) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 20, 2018
Start date
Feb 25, 2017
Primary completion
Mar 1, 2018
Completion
Mar 1, 2018
Last update
Mar 21, 2018

Study contacts

Abdul k Azad, MDS
principal investigator · Melaka Manipal Medical College,Faculty of Dentistry, Manipal Academy of Higher Education

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion