Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background: The authors aimed to assess whether 4% articaine is a safe and effective local anesthetic (LA) for mandibular third-molar extractions. Types of studies reviewed: The authors searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify randomized clinical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Santos-Sanz, Laura, Toledano Serrabona, Jorge, Gay Escoda, Cosme
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión aceptada para publicación
Fecha de publicación:2020
País:España
Institución:Universidad de Barcelona
Repositorio:Dipòsit Digital de la UB
OAI Identifier:oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/194719
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/2445/194719
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Anestèsia en odontologia
Dent molar
Cirurgia oral
Metaanàlisi
Anesthesia in dentistry
Molar
Oral surgery
Meta-analysis
id ES_e03581d87355b3c8a1587108bbcfe852
oai_identifier_str oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/194719
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trialsSantos-Sanz, LauraToledano Serrabona, JorgeGay Escoda, CosmeAnestèsia en odontologiaDent molarCirurgia oralMetaanàlisiAnesthesia in dentistryMolarOral surgeryMeta-analysisBackground: The authors aimed to assess whether 4% articaine is a safe and effective local anesthetic (LA) for mandibular third-molar extractions. Types of studies reviewed: The authors searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify randomized clinical trials that fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool. The authors performed a meta-analysis of safety and efficacy variables comparing 4% articaine with different LAs. Results: The authors assessed 482 articles but only 14 randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria for review. No statistically significant differences were found among the selected LAs regarding safety. Four percent articaine required fewer reinjections than 2% lidocaine and had a shorter onset time than 2% lidocaine, 0.5% bupivacaine, and 4% lidocaine. Four percent articaine had a longer anesthesia effect than 2% lidocaine and 2% mepivacaine, but a shorter anesthesia effect than 0.5% bupivacaine. Practical implications: Use of 4% articaine for mandibular third-molar extraction is a safe choice that requires fewer reinjections and has a shorter onset time than other aminoamide-type LAs.Elsevier2020info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/194719Articles publicats en revistes (Odontoestomatologia)reponame:Dipòsit Digital de la UBinstname:Universidad de BarcelonaInglésVersió postprint del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2020.08.016Journal of the American Dental Association, 2020, vol. 151, num. 12, p. 912-923https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2020.08.016cc-by-nc-nd (c) American Dental Association, 2020https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/1947192026-05-27T06:46:51Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
spellingShingle Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Santos-Sanz, Laura
Anestèsia en odontologia
Dent molar
Cirurgia oral
Metaanàlisi
Anesthesia in dentistry
Molar
Oral surgery
Meta-analysis
title_short Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_full Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_fullStr Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_full_unstemmed Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_sort Safety and efficacy of 4% articaine in mandibular third-molar extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Santos-Sanz, Laura
Toledano Serrabona, Jorge
Gay Escoda, Cosme
author Santos-Sanz, Laura
author_facet Santos-Sanz, Laura
Toledano Serrabona, Jorge
Gay Escoda, Cosme
author_role author
author2 Toledano Serrabona, Jorge
Gay Escoda, Cosme
author2_role author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Anestèsia en odontologia
Dent molar
Cirurgia oral
Metaanàlisi
Anesthesia in dentistry
Molar
Oral surgery
Meta-analysis
topic Anestèsia en odontologia
Dent molar
Cirurgia oral
Metaanàlisi
Anesthesia in dentistry
Molar
Oral surgery
Meta-analysis
description Background: The authors aimed to assess whether 4% articaine is a safe and effective local anesthetic (LA) for mandibular third-molar extractions. Types of studies reviewed: The authors searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify randomized clinical trials that fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool. The authors performed a meta-analysis of safety and efficacy variables comparing 4% articaine with different LAs. Results: The authors assessed 482 articles but only 14 randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria for review. No statistically significant differences were found among the selected LAs regarding safety. Four percent articaine required fewer reinjections than 2% lidocaine and had a shorter onset time than 2% lidocaine, 0.5% bupivacaine, and 4% lidocaine. Four percent articaine had a longer anesthesia effect than 2% lidocaine and 2% mepivacaine, but a shorter anesthesia effect than 0.5% bupivacaine. Practical implications: Use of 4% articaine for mandibular third-molar extraction is a safe choice that requires fewer reinjections and has a shorter onset time than other aminoamide-type LAs.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
format article
status_str acceptedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/2445/194719
url https://hdl.handle.net/2445/194719
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Versió postprint del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2020.08.016
Journal of the American Dental Association, 2020, vol. 151, num. 12, p. 912-923
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2020.08.016
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv cc-by-nc-nd (c) American Dental Association, 2020
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv cc-by-nc-nd (c) American Dental Association, 2020
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Articles publicats en revistes (Odontoestomatologia)
reponame:Dipòsit Digital de la UB
instname:Universidad de Barcelona
instname_str Universidad de Barcelona
reponame_str Dipòsit Digital de la UB
collection Dipòsit Digital de la UB
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869422181489836032
score 15,301603

Similares en LA Referencia