4. Discussion
pulpitis
PULPITIS
The discovery of LAA led to the advent of pain-free dentistry. These agents have now become an indispensable part of endodontics. Without their use, routine procedures cannot be carried out optimally, primarily because of patient discomfort. The effectiveness of anesthesia, particularly the IANB, is subject to multiple factors, mainly anatomical considerations, clinical expertise, and formulation of the anesthetic agent used [The present study revealed no statistically significant difference between the effectiveness of 2% Lidocaine and 4% Articaine. These results align with those of prior research carried out by Philips et al. and Simon et al. [Although the results are statistically insignificant, Lidocaine demonstrated a 93% success rate during ACP whereas Articaine displayed a slightly higher rate of 97%. These efficacy rates are consistent with earlier studies in which the findings, while statistically insignificant, indicated a slightly better success rate for Articaine compared to Lidocaine. In an RCT on irreversible pulpitis, Brunetto and colleagues reported a 63.6% success rate for Articaine and a 54.5% success rate for Lidocaine, with no statistically significant difference in the AE of the two agents [Certain studies have posited that Articaine may possess superior AE to Lidocaine. The trials conducted in Pakistan have compared the anesthetic effectiveness of Articaine and Lidocaine. Sheba et al. found insignificant difference between the two aforementioned agents [Whether Articaine demonstrates anesthetic effectiveness superior to or on par with Lidocaine, it may emerge as a potential alternative to the conventionally employed Lidocaine. Although Lidocaine remains the anesthetic of choice in dentistry, and is still considered the gold standard worldwide, many reports and editorials have favored the use of Articaine. A survey conducted among dentists in New Zealand in 2016 revealed that Articaine was the most popular anesthetic agent among the majority [A distinctive aspect of the current research is that it compared the effectiveness of both types of anesthesia across different types of teeth, including molars and premolars. This contrasts with previous studies conducted by Henry et al. and Q Khan et al., which focused solely on the molar teeth [