Articaine buccal infiltration vs lidocaine inferior dental block - a review of the literature

Br Dent J. 2016 Feb 12;220(3):117-20. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.93.


Aim: This paper aims to compare the effectiveness of articaine buccal infiltrations (BIs) and lidocaine inferior alveolar nerve blocks (IANBs) for inducing pulpal anaesthesia in mandibular molars.

Method: Studies which compared articaine BIs with lidocaine IANBs were identified by completing a full literature search using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only studies that used permanent mandibular molars were included. Two papers were accepted for appraisal.

Results: It was found that 55.6-69.2% and 65.4-70.4% of lidocaine IANBs and articaine BIs were successful, respectively. Neither study was able to determine a significant difference between the two techniques.

Conclusions: Articaine BIs are no more effective than lidocaine IANBs and the decision of which method to practice should be based on patient selection, cost and time efficiency. The studies present a number of weaknesses in their design, hence, the level of evidence they provide is inconclusive. Further investigation in this field is warranted.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Administration, Buccal
  • Anesthesia, Dental / methods*
  • Anesthesia, Local / methods
  • Anesthetics, Local* / administration & dosage
  • Carticaine* / administration & dosage
  • Humans
  • Lidocaine* / administration & dosage
  • Mandibular Nerve
  • Nerve Block / methods*


  • Anesthetics, Local
  • Lidocaine
  • Carticaine