Efficacy of Pulpal Anesthesia Using a Needle-less Syringe

Comparative Evaluation of the Anesthetic Efficacy of Needle-Free Anesthesia and Conventional Anesthesia in Patients With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Introduction Pain is the primary reason for which most of the patients seek endodontic treatment. Local anesthesia is considered to be the most important step in the procedure to reduce the pain. However, the majority of the patients do not cooperate due to the fear of syringe anesthesia. The aim of this clinical trial was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of needle-free anesthesia and conventional anesthesia in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis undergoing root canal therapy. Materials and methods A total of 54 patients were enrolled in the study, and the treatment was administered by a single operator. The initial assessment of vitality included cold testing, heat testing, and electric pulp testing. Preoperative pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) before the administration of anesthesia. Local anesthesia was administered according to the group assigned: Group 1 (conventional anesthesia) and Group 2 (needle-free anesthesia). The pain was assessed during the administration of anesthesia. Following the administration of anesthesia, the vitality of the tooth was evaluated using cold testing, heat testing, and electric pulp testing. Subsequently, the tooth was isolated with a rubber dam, and the access cavity was prepared. The pain was assessed during access cavity preparation and during the first file insertion. Working length was determined using an apex locator (Root ZX Mini, J Morita, Saitama, Japan) and was confirmed using intraoral periapical radiographs. Later on, further treatment was carried out. Results A total of 54 participants were included in this clinical trial. There was no significant difference in mean age distribution between the two groups (p=0.852). Considering the frequency distribution of gender, there was no significant difference; however, Group 1 had more female participants (59.3%) compared to Group 2 (33.3%). There was a significant reduction in the mean pain score in Group 2 compared to Group 1 during the delivery of anesthetic agents (p=0.000). Conclusion Needle-free anesthesia proves to be equally effective as the conventional syringe system in patients experiencing symptomatic irreversible pulpitis undergoing root canal treatment. However, it is noteworthy that patients exhibited greater comfort levels with needle-free anesthesia systems specifically during the administration of the anesthetic solution.