Volume : 11, Issue : 02,February – 2024
Title:
A REVIEW ARTICLE ON ARTICAINE -LOCAL ANESTHETIC DRUG
Authors :
R. Jona Methusala, D.Lahari
Abstract :
Articaine is an amide-type LA that has an onset and duration of anaesthesia similar to those of other intermediate-acting amide LAs. The most significant benefit of articaine over lidocaine is that it may have somewhat faster onset and greater depth of action. Articaine is 1.5 times as potent and only 0.6 times as toxic as lidocaine and has been shown to be superior in achieving successful anaesthesia following infiltration. It is not for injection in children under 4 years of age. However, the use of inferior alveolar nerve blocks can be almost eliminated in children by using articaine due to its ability to anaesthetize teeth effectively by infiltration up to the first permanent molar region. In addition, diffusion of articaine on to the palatal surface may also eliminate the discomfort of palatal infiltration. It can also be used in patients taking beta-blockers.
Keywords: articaine, regional anesthesia, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, therapeutic use, tolerability, neurotoxicity
Cite This Article:
Please cite this article in press R. Jona Methusala et al., A Review Article On Articaine -Local Anesthetic Drug, Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2024; 11 (02).
Number of Downloads : 10
References:
1. ^ Jump up to:a b “Sanofi: 40 Jahre Ultracain in der Lokalanästhesie”. zm-online (in German). 19 February 2016. Retrieved 2021-08-02.
2. “O. Schmiedeberg-Plakette”. dgpt-online.de. Archived from the original on 2021-08-02. Retrieved 2021-08-02.
3. McLure HA, Rubin AP. Review of local anaesthetic agents. Minerva Anestesiol. 2005;71:59–74. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. 16. De Martin S, Orlando R, Bertoli M. Differential effect of chronic renal failure on the pharmacokinetics of lidocaine in patients receiving hemodialysis. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2006;80:597–606. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Mazoit JX, Dalens BJ. Pharmacokinetics of local anaesthetics in infants and children. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2004;43:17–32. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Evans G, Nusstein J, Drum M, Reader A, Beck M. A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of articaine and lidocaine for maxillary infiltrations. J Endod. 2008;34(4):389–93. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. 12. Lenka L, Jain N, Mohanty R, Singh DK, Gulati M. A clinical comparison of three techniques of mandibular local anaesthesia. Adv Hum Biol. 2014;4(1):13–9. [Google Scholar]
8. 15. Shital P, Tushar M. Comparison of efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride and 2% lignocaine hydrochloride for the orthodontic extraction of bilateral maxillary permanent first premolars. J Res Adv Dent. 2014;3(1):192–8. [Google Scholar]
9. 16. Hassan S, Rao BH, Sequeria J, Rai G. Efficacy of 4% articaine hydrochloride and 2% lignocaine hydrochloride in the extraction of maxillary premolars for orthodontic reasons. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2011;1(1):14–8. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. 3. Gordon SM, Mischenko AV, Dionne RA. Long-acting local anesthetics and perioperative pain management. Dent Clin North Am. 2010;54:611–20
11. 7. Ready LB, Plumer MH, Haschke RH, Austin E, Sumi SM. Neurotoxicity of intrathecal local anesthetics in rabbits. Anesthesiology. 1985;63:364–70. FF