Evaluation of the onset of pulpal, soft tissue anesthesia, and pain using buffered lidocaine in children: a randomized-controlled trial

The American Academy of Paediatric Dentistry (AAPD) has recently released guidelines that highlight the importance of conducting further research on the effects of buffered local anesthesia in children. Adjusting the pH of local anesthetics may reduce pain and reduce the onset time of anaesthesia. In this study, we evaluated the onset of pulpal, soft tissue anesthesia and pain during inferior alveolar nerve block injection to treat pulpally involved mandibular primary molars with buffered lidocaine in comparison with non-buffered lidocaine. We conducted a prospective, randomized, triple-blind, crossover trial involving 40 children aged 7 to 10 years. The onset time of soft tissue anaesthesia was assessed by probing the gingiva after ensuring numbness of the tongue, the lower lip, and the angle of the mouth, while the onset time for pulpal anaesthesia assessed using Endo-ice. We identified a significant difference between buffered lidocaine and non-buffered lidocaine in the onset time of pulpal and soft tissue anesthesia (p < 0.001). Analysis also identified a showed a significant difference between the two groups for the Wong-Baker Faces pain rating scale (p < 0.006) and the Sound, Eye and Motor scale (p < 0.043). In conclusion, buffered lidocaine reduced the onset time for anaesthesia in pulpal and soft tissue, and reduced pain during the administration of inferior alveolar nerve block injections in children. According to the findings of this study, buffered lidocaine can be utilized as an alternative to non-buffered lidocaine in children.

Buffered lidocaine; Children; Inferior alveolar nerve block; Lidocaine; Local anesthesia

[1] Dhake P, Nagpal D, Chaudhari P, Lamba G, Hotwani K, Singh P. Buffered articaine infiltration for primary maxillary molar extractions: a randomized controlled study. Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. 2022; 22: 387.

[2] Gufran K, Mirza MB, Robaian A, Alqahtani AS, Alqhtani NR, Alasqah M, et al. A prospective clinical study evaluating the efficacy of intra-ligamentary anesthetic solutions in mandibular molars diagnosed as symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with symptomatic apical periodontitis. Healthcare. 2022; 10: 1389.

[3] Singh MDS DN, PJ DN. To compare the effectiveness of complementary therapies on pain perception to intra-oral needle insertion in pediatric patients—a randomized clinical trial. International Journal of Innovative Research in Multidisciplinary Education. 2023; 02: 126–133.

[4] Mujtaba B, Braimah RO. Buffering of local anaesthesia in dentistry: a review. Nigerian Journal of Dental Research. 2023; 8: 14–19.

[5] Hopkins E, Sanvictores T, Sharma S. Physiology, acid base balance‏. StatPearls Publishing: StatPearls. 2022.

[6] Malamed SF. Recent Advances in Local Anesthesia. In Malamed SF (ed.) Handbook of local anesthesia (pp. 383–387). 7th edn. Elsevier: St. Louis, Missouri. 2020.

[7] Puspitasari TE, Musnamirwan IA, Gunawan KL, Gartika M. Pain parameters for buffered and non-buffered anesthetic injections in children undergoing dental procedures. Dental Journal. 2023; 56: 58–62.

[8] Sadananda V, Jubana MK, Hegde MN, Shetty A, Gatti P. Comparison of buffered and non-buffered lidocaine: pH and pain perception. World Academy of Sciences Journal. 2022; 4: 4–7.

[9] Chopra R, Jindal G, Sachdev V, Sandhu M. Double-blind crossover study to compare pain experience during inferior alveolar nerve block administration using buffered two percent lidocaine in children. Pediatric Dentistry. 2016; 38: 25–29.

[10] Malamed SF. Neurophysiology. In Malamed SF (ed.) Handbook of local anesthesia (pp. 2–26). 7th edn. Elsevier: St. Louis, Missouri. 2020.

[11] Malamed SF. Clinical Action of Specific Agents. In Malamed SF (ed.) Handbook of local anesthesia (pp. 57–84). 7th edn. Elsevier: St. Louis, Missouri. 2020.

[12] Manta K, Dabarakis N, Lillis T, Fotopoulos I. Anesthetic efficacy of buffered 4% articaine for mandibular first molar infiltration: a crossover clinical trial. Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. 2023; 23: 135.

[13] Senthoor P, Janani K, Ravindran C. A prospective, randomized double-blinded study to evaluate the efficacy of buffered local anesthetics in infected and inflamed pulp and periapical tissues. Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery. 2020; 19: 246–250.

[14] Torres-Rojas K, Chumpitaz-Cerrate V, Chávez-Rimache L, Núñez-Díaz D, Pérez-Jimenez V. Comparison of the anesthetic effect of alkalized lidocaine versus non-alkalized lidocaine administered at a slow rate in mandibular primary molars. Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects. 2023; 17: 47–53.

[15] Wong DL, Baker CM. Pain in children: comparison of assessment scale. Pediatric Nursing. 1988; 14: 9–17.

[16] Nuvvula S, Saikiran KV, Elicherla SR, Sahithi V, Nunna M, Challa RR. Local anesthesia in pediatric dentistry: a literature review on current alternative techniques and approaches. Journal of South Asian Association of Pediatric Dentistry. 2021; 4: 148–154.

[17] Kurien RS, Goswami M, singh S. Comparative evaluation of anesthetic efficacy of warm, buffered and conventional 2% lignocaine for the success of inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in mandibular primary molars: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects. 2018; 12: 102–109.

[18] Boerner KE, Birnie KA, Caes L, Schinkel M, Chambers CT. Sex differences in experimental pain among healthy children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain. 2014; 155: 983–993.

[19] Kattan S, Lee S, Hersh EV, Karabucak B. Do buffered local anesthetics provide more successful anesthesia than nonbuffered solutions in patients with pulpally involved teeth requiring dental therapy? The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2019; 150: 165–177.

[20] Koja DB, Bede SY. Evaluation of buffered local anaesthesia in dental extraction: a randomized controlled study. Oral Surgery. 2022; 15: 489–495.

[21] Kalra G, Makkar S, Menrai N, Kalia V, Suri N, Gupta S. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy and onset of local anesthesia using buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline, non-buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline, buffered 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline and non-buffered 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline and non-buffered 4% articaine with 1:100,000 adrenaline in dental extraction. Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery. 2023; 1–6.

[22] Jain TK, Jha R, Tiwari A, Agrawal N, Mali S, Sinha A, et al. A comparative study to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of buffered versus non-buffered 2% lidocaine during inferior alveolar nerve block. Cureus. 2022; 14: e31855

[23] Afsal MM, Khatri A, Kalra N, Tyagi R, Khandelwal D. ‏Pain perception and efficacy of local analgesia using 2% lignocaine, buffered lignocaine, and 4% articaine in pediatric dental procedure. Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. 2019; 19: 101.

[24] Kashyap VM, Desai R, Reddy PB, Menon S. Effect of alkalinisation of lignocaine for intraoral nerve block on pain during injection, and speed of onset of anaesthesia. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2011; 49: e72–e75.

[25] Malamed SF, Tavana S, Falkel M. Faster onset and more comfortable injection with alkalinized 2% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:100,000. Compendium of continuing education in dentistry. 2013; 34: 10–20.

[26] Baker SD, Lee JY, White RP, Collins L, Bodnar W, Philips C, et al. Double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing one percent buffered versus two percent unbuffered lidocaine injections in children. Pediatric Dentistry. 2021; 43: 88–94.

[27] Lai T, Lin C, Kok S, Yang P, Kuo Y, Lan W, et al. Evaluation of mandibular block using a standardized method. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology. 2006; 102: 462–468.