@Article{, title={Assessment of anesthetic efficacy of 4%articaine and 2%Lidocaine during implant pilot hole preparation in the mandibular posterior region infiltration}, author={Dr. Jabbar J. Kareem (Lecturer).* د. جبار جاسم كريم}, journal={MUSTANSIRIA DENTAL JOURNAL مجلة المستنصرية لطب الاسنان}, volume={9}, number={1}, pages={64-69}, year={2012}, abstract={Aim.The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the anesthetic efficacy of 4%articaine and 2% lidocaine (both with 1:100,000 epinepherine) for buccal andlingual infiltration in patients need implant placement.Materials and methods.Forty patients have edentulus regions posterier to mentalforamen were divided into 4 study groups and received buccal and lingualinfiltration of either 4% articaine or 2% lidocaine. Surgical procedure was begun5 minutes after solution deposition. Success was defined as no or milddiscomfort (VAS recordings) during during pilot hole drill.Results.The success rate for mandibular infiltration to produce anesthesia usingarticaine was 100% in premolar and molar area for the articaine solution andsuccess rate was 80% in preamolar and 30% in molar area. There was highsignificant difference between the articaine and lidocaine solutions (ANOVA P< 0.001).Conclusion. The efficacy of 4% articaine was superior to 2% lidocaine formandibular posterior regoin.

} }