Authors Sehrish Murtaza Department of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi. Faisal Bhangar Department of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi. Shoaib Hameed Department of Orthodontics, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi. Aqeel Ibrahim Department of Prosthodontics, Military Dental Center Bahawalpur Muhammad Bin Mahmood Department of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi. Iqra Murtaza Department of Dental, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58397/et56a962 Keywords: inferior alveolar nerve block, buccal infiltration, lidocaine, articaine, root canal therapy, root canal treatment, anesthesia, mandibular molars, endodontics Abstract

Objective: To determine the anesthetic effectiveness of inferior alveolar nerve block with 2% lidocaine and inferior alveolar nerve block with 2% lidocaine supplemented with 4% articaine buccal infiltration for the mandibular molars in non-surgical root canal treatment with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.
Methods: This prospective interventional comparative single-blind study was conducted at PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi. Based on the non-probability convenience sampling, 88 adults aged 18-52 years old, with irreversible pulpitis of vital mandibular molars diagnosed as spontaneous lingering pain with positive cold pulp test, were randomly allocated to either Group A, who received IANB with 2% lidocaine alone or Group B received IANB with 2% lidocaine supplemented with 4% articaine buccal
infiltration. Heft Parker VAS Scale was used to report pain levels during the endodontic treatment. SPSS 27.00 software version was used to analyze the data.
Results: Mean age in Group A was 35.6 ± 9.16 years, while in Group B it was 32.9 ± 10.54 years. Mean VAS pain score in Group A was 3.3 ± 2.68 compared to 3.0 ± 2.39 in Group B. There were 20 (45.5%) males and 24 (54.5%) females in Group A, and 30 (68.2%) males and 14 (31.8%) females in Group B. Pain severity in Group-A was no Pain 6 (13.6%), Mild Pain 21 (47.7%), Moderate Pain 11 (25.0%), and Severe Pain 6 (13.6%); in Group-B, No Pain 5 (11.4%), Mild Pain 28 (63.6%), Moderate
Pain 6 (13.6%), and Severe Pain 5 (11.4%). Treatment effectiveness was achieved in 28 (63.6%) patients in Group A and 33 (75.0%) in Group B.
Conclusion: The combined approach of IANB with 2% lidocaine supplemented with 4% articaine buccal infiltration had significantly improved the anesthetic success outcome as compared to the 2% lidocaine alone for IANB.

Author Biographies

Sehrish Murtaza, Department of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi.

B.D.S., FCPS (Resident)

Operative Dentistry and Endodontics

Faisal Bhangar, Department of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi.

B.D.S., FCPS

Associate Professor and Consultant

Operative Dentistry and Endodontics

Shoaib Hameed, Department of Orthodontics, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi.

B.D.S., MDS, MFDRCSI, FFDRCSI

Associate Professor and Consultant

Orthodontics

Aqeel Ibrahim, Department of Prosthodontics, Military Dental Center Bahawalpur

B.D.S, FCPS

Associate Professor and Consultant

Prosthodontics

Muhammad Bin Mahmood, Department of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi.

B.D.S, FCPS (Resident)

Operative Dentistry and Endodontics

PNS Shifa Hospital

Iqra Murtaza, Department of Dental, PNS Shifa Hospital, Karachi.

Issue Section

Original Article

License

Copyright (c) 2026 ANNALS OF ABBASI SHAHEED HOSPITAL AND KARACHI MEDICAL & DENTAL COLLEGE

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Annals of Abbasi Shaheed Hospital and Karachi Medical and Dental College acquires copyright ownership of the content. The articles are distributed under a Creative Commons (CC) Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). This license permit uses, distribution and reproduction in any medium; provided the original work is properly cited and initial publication in this journal.