Blood Levels of Buffered vs Non-buffered LidocaineBUFFLNCT02620683
Clinical Outcomes of Buffered vs. Non-Buffered Lidocaine
A study testing Lidocaine in people with Blood Levels of Buffered vs Non-buffered Lidocaine and Anesthetics, Local, run by University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Anecdotal reports suggest buffering lidocaine with epinephrine just before intraoral injection reduces time of onset, results in a deeper anesthetic effect, without the "sting" with injection from a low pH. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 30 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Blood Levels of Buffered vs Non-buffered Lidocaine, Anesthetics, Local
- What is being tested?
- Lidocaine
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 23 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Dec 2015to Sep 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 30 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Age 18-30 years
- ASA I
- Willingness to complete QOL instrument
- Willingness to participate in two sessions
Who cannot join
- Allergy to lidocaine class of anesthetic drugs
- Local anesthetic drug use in past week
- Current symptoms teeth or oral mucosa
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
UNC School of Dentistry
Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27599-7450
About this study
Official title: Comparison of Buffered vs. Non-Buffered Lidocaine Used in Dental and Oral Surgical Procedures: Clinical Outcomes
Anecdotal reports suggest buffering lidocaine with epinephrine just before intraoral injection reduces time of onset, results in a deeper anesthetic effect, without the "sting" with injection from a low pH. Additional data are needed to establish clinical important outcomes such as the peak blood level of lidocaine as compared to the non-buffered drug combination.
Clinical pilot studies are proposed as the start of a series of investigations to support or modify the use of the buffered anesthetic for intraoral procedures.
Read the detailed description
Specific Aims:
Compare blood levels at 30min post injection mandibular block with buffered and non- buffered 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine. Assess outcomes (pain levels during and post-injection, and onset of anesthesia symptoms) after buffered and non-buffered oral administration of 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine. Assess possible topical anesthetic properties of buffered and non-buffered oral administration of 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine
Hypotheses:
No difference in peak blood levels exist between buffered and non-buffered intraoral injection of 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine.
Injection of buffered local anesthetic will produce less discomfort for the subject as compared to the drug with a low pH.
Buffered local anesthetic will not produce a topical anesthetic effect
Study Time Frame: 6 months Month One IRB approvals. Recruit volunteers as subjects. Prepare case-books. Months Two-Three Clinical Study Months Four-Five Analyze Lab, QOL data Month Six Prepare Abstracts, Papers
Methods: Blinded, Randomized Clinical Design Recruit subjects with IRB approved consent at UNC Target enrollment 24 subjects Subjects will serve as their own controls in a cross-over AB/BA study design which is uniform within sequences, uniform within periods, and balanced Sample size justification: Primary interest is estimation of effect size from pilot study. 24 subjects should be sufficient to provide data to assess whether a larger study is warranted and provide estimates for sample size calculation for larger studies. Vital signs recorded: 10 min before, during at 30min intervals and after post-anesthetic clinical signs disappear: targeted lower lip no longer numb. Randomized subjects to be injected alternatively with 4cc of buffered and 4cc non-buffered oral administration of 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine.
SAS will be used to create randomization schedules:
The randomization will be performed first to type of drug given with a balanced randomization (half subjects buffered; half to non-buffered) An OMS resident, Dr Phero, will administer the drugs in the OMS clinic.
In week One each subject would receive anesthetic to block the inferior alveolar and lingual N; Halstead or Gow-Gates techniques. No Buccal N. block. At least a week later injections would involve the alternate local anesthetic combination.
Venous blood samples would be drawn from the antecubital fossa 30min post oral injection and assayed for blood lidocaine levels Timed Assessment: pre, during injection, and post-anesthetic for Clinical Onset of Anesthesia Signs: subject reported molar area numbness and numb lower lip on ipsilateral injected side. Assessment for pain level on injection; modified Likert-type scale
In addition at each clinic session an assessment of a topical anesthetic effect on contralateral lower lip with 5 drops of the injected drug placed on the clinically dry lower lip mucosa, Outcome yes/no.
Data Collection: UNC OMS clinic Venous blood samples (10cc) will be drawn from the antecubital fossa 30min post oral injection. Timed assessment pre, during injection, and post-anesthetic clinical Signs: molar area anesthesia, incisor area anesthesia, and numb lower lip for topical
Data Collection/Analysis:
Data will be managed by study staff. Data collection forms and questionnaires for clinical data will be developed to use Teleform for direct scanning input into an ACCESS database. Similar forms have been used in previous studies. All databases are stored on a password protected School of Dentistry server with specific group assignment. SAS will be used for database management and statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics are used to verify correct entry through range and logical checks.
- Being tested
- Lidocaine
- Keywords
- lidocaine, jaw
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
LidocaineDrug
Also called Xylocaine
See above
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Buffered Lidocaine | Active comparator | In week One each subject would receive anesthetic to block the inferior alveolar and lingual N; Halstead or Gow-Gates techniques. No Buccal N. block.
Venous blood samples would be drawn from the antecubital fossa 30min post oral injection and assayed for blood lidocaine levels Receives: Drug: Lidocaine |
| Non-buffered Lidocaine | Active comparator | In week One each subject would receive anesthetic to block the inferior alveolar and lingual N; Halstead or Gow-Gates techniques. No Buccal N. block. At least a week later injections would involve the alternate local anesthetic combination.
Venous blood samples would be drawn from the antecubital fossa 30min post oral injection and assayed for blood lidocaine levels Receives: Drug: Lidocaine |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Lidocaine Blood Levels 30 Minutes Post Injection
Lidocaine blood levels were obtained 30 minutes post injection micro g/L The difference between injection type- 95% confidence intervals for the difference between injection types was calculated. For the outcome variable, an assessment of treatment difference by subject, calculated as 1% Buffered minus 2% Non-Buffered, was performed using Wilcoxon rank sum tests with Proc NPAR1WAY (SAS v 9.3). Statistical significance was set as P < 0.05 for all outcomes.
Measured: 30 minutes post injection
Secondary outcomes (3)
Pain Intensity Scores
Patients reported pain level immediately after injection of lidocaine via a Likert type scale where 1 = No Pain and 10 = Worst Pain Imaginable.
For the outcome variable, an assessment of treatment difference by subject, calculated as 1% Buffered minus 2% Non-Buffered was performed.
Measured: Immediately after lidocaine injection
Number of Minutes to Anesthesia Symptoms of Lower Lip
Patients were instructed to record the time when they experienced the initial indication of anesthesia signs in the lower lip. This was reported as the number of minutes following nerve block injection.
For the outcome variable, an assessment of treatment difference by subject, calculated as 1% Buffered minus 2% Non-Buffered was performed.
Measured: Patient report of anesthesia symptom onset following injection
Topical Anesthesia Effect Contralateral Lower Lip
Investigator will administer 5-6 drops of the lidocaine to the contralateral lower lip and immediately ask if signs of numbness are present on the lip.
Patients reported presence of numbness lower lip-Yes or No
Measured: At time of administration
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Dec 2015 (estimated)
- Study startDec 2015
- Primary completionAug 2017
- Study completionSep 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Blood Levels of Buffered vs Non-buffered LidocaineStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of North Carolina, Chapel HillThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider
- Enrolment
- 23 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Dental Foundation of North Carolina, Inc.
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Raymond P White, Jr, DDS, PhD, Principal investigator, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02620683
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 15-1741
- Other IDs
- CHDEN 29920, D0117439000
- Acronym
- BUFFL
- Status last verified
- Oct 2017
- First submitted
- 1 Dec 2015
- Last updated
- 23 Jan 2018
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Phero JA, Nelson B, Davis B, Dunlop N, Phillips C, Reside G, Tikunov AP, White RP Jr. Buffered Versus Non-Buffered Lidocaine With Epinephrine for Mandibular Nerve Block: Clinical Outcomes. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Apr;75(4):688-693. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2016.09.055. Epub 2016 Oct 8.
PubMed 27815105
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Jan 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of Buffered vs. Non-Buffered Lidocaine Used in Dental and Oral Surgical Procedures: Clinical Outcomes
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02620683
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- BUFFL / 15-1741
- Keywords
- lidocaine, jaw
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 23 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of North Carolina, Chapel HillUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Dental Foundation of North Carolina, Inc.
- Study start
- Dec 2015
- Primary completion
- Aug 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- Sep 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 Dec 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 23 Jan 2018
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Anecdotal reports suggest buffering lidocaine with epinephrine just before intraoral injection reduces time of onset, results in a deeper anesthetic effect, without the "sting" with injection from a low pH. Additional data are needed to establish clinical important outcomes such as the peak blood level of lidocaine as compared to the non-buffered drug combination.
Clinical pilot studies are proposed as the start of a series of investigations to support or modify the use of the buffered anesthetic for intraoral procedures.
Detailed description
Specific Aims:
Compare blood levels at 30min post injection mandibular block with buffered and non- buffered 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine. Assess outcomes (pain levels during and post-injection, and onset of anesthesia symptoms) after buffered and non-buffered oral administration of 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine. Assess possible topical anesthetic properties of buffered and non-buffered oral administration of 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine
Hypotheses:
No difference in peak blood levels exist between buffered and non-buffered intraoral injection of 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine.
Injection of buffered local anesthetic will produce less discomfort for the subject as compared to the drug with a low pH.
Buffered local anesthetic will not produce a topical anesthetic effect
Study Time Frame: 6 months Month One IRB approvals. Recruit volunteers as subjects. Prepare case-books. Months Two-Three Clinical Study Months Four-Five Analyze Lab, QOL data Month Six Prepare Abstracts, Papers
Methods: Blinded, Randomized Clinical Design Recruit subjects with IRB approved consent at UNC Target enrollment 24 subjects Subjects will serve as their own controls in a cross-over AB/BA study design which is uniform within sequences, uniform within periods, and balanced Sample size justification: Primary interest is estimation of effect size from pilot study. 24 subjects should be sufficient to provide data to assess whether a larger study is warranted and provide estimates for sample size calculation for larger studies. Vital signs recorded: 10 min before, during at 30min intervals and after post-anesthetic clinical signs disappear: targeted lower lip no longer numb. Randomized subjects to be injected alternatively with 4cc of buffered and 4cc non-buffered oral administration of 2% lidocaine with 1/100k epinephrine.
SAS will be used to create randomization schedules:
The randomization will be performed first to type of drug given with a balanced randomization (half subjects buffered; half to non-buffered) An OMS resident, Dr Phero, will administer the drugs in the OMS clinic.
In week One each subject would receive anesthetic to block the inferior alveolar and lingual N; Halstead or Gow-Gates techniques. No Buccal N. block. At least a week later injections would involve the alternate local anesthetic combination.
Venous blood samples would be drawn from the antecubital fossa 30min post oral injection and assayed for blood lidocaine levels Timed Assessment: pre, during injection, and post-anesthetic for Clinical Onset of Anesthesia Signs: subject reported molar area numbness and numb lower lip on ipsilateral injected side. Assessment for pain level on injection; modified Likert-type scale
In addition at each clinic session an assessment of a topical anesthetic effect on contralateral lower lip with 5 drops of the injected drug placed on the clinically dry lower lip mucosa, Outcome yes/no.
Data Collection: UNC OMS clinic Venous blood samples (10cc) will be drawn from the antecubital fossa 30min post oral injection. Timed assessment pre, during injection, and post-anesthetic clinical Signs: molar area anesthesia, incisor area anesthesia, and numb lower lip for topical
Data Collection/Analysis:
Data will be managed by study staff. Data collection forms and questionnaires for clinical data will be developed to use Teleform for direct scanning input into an ACCESS database. Similar forms have been used in previous studies. All databases are stored on a password protected School of Dentistry server with specific group assignment. SAS will be used for database management and statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics are used to verify correct entry through range and logical checks.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, care provider)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Buffered Lidocaine | Active comparator | Drug: LidocaineIn week One each subject would receive anesthetic to block the inferior alveolar and lingual N; Halstead or Gow-Gates techniques. No Buccal N. block. Venous blood samples would be drawn from the antecubital fossa 30min post oral injection and assayed for blood lidocaine levels |
| Non-buffered Lidocaine | Active comparator | Drug: LidocaineIn week One each subject would receive anesthetic to block the inferior alveolar and lingual N; Halstead or Gow-Gates techniques. No Buccal N. block. At least a week later injections would involve the alternate local anesthetic combination. Venous blood samples would be drawn from the antecubital fossa 30min post oral injection and assayed for blood lidocaine levels |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 30 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Age 18-30 years
- ASA I
- Willingness to complete QOL instrument
- Willingness to participate in two sessions
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Allergy to lidocaine class of anesthetic drugs
- Local anesthetic drug use in past week
- Current symptoms teeth or oral mucosa
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| LidocaineAlso: XylocaineSee above | Drug | Buffered Lidocaine, Non-buffered Lidocaine |
Primary outcome
Lidocaine Blood Levels 30 Minutes Post Injection
Time frame: 30 minutes post injection
Lidocaine blood levels were obtained 30 minutes post injection micro g/L The difference between injection type- 95% confidence intervals for the difference between injection types was calculated. For the outcome variable, an assessment of treatment difference by subject, calculated as 1% Buffered minus 2% Non-Buffered, was performed using Wilcoxon rank sum tests with Proc NPAR1WAY (SAS v 9.3). Statistical significance was set as P < 0.05 for all outcomes.
3 secondary outcomes
Pain Intensity Scores
Time frame: Immediately after lidocaine injection
Number of Minutes to Anesthesia Symptoms of Lower Lip
Time frame: Patient report of anesthesia symptom onset following injection
Topical Anesthesia Effect Contralateral Lower Lip
Time frame: At time of administration
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Jan 2018.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Results publication: PubMed 27815105Phero JA, Nelson B, Davis B, Dunlop N, Phillips C, Reside G, Tikunov AP, White RP Jr. Buffered Versus Non-Buffered Lidocaine With Epinephrine for Mandibular Nerve Block: Clinical Outcomes. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Apr;75(4):688-693. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2016.09.055. Epub 2016 Oct 8.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Raymond P White, Jr, DDS, PhD principal investigator
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Lidocaine in people with Blood Levels of Buffered vs Non-buffered Lidocaine and Anesthetics, Local, run by University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Jan 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 23 Jan 2018). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Lidocaine Blood Levels 30 Minutes Post Injection (time frame: 30 minutes post injection). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02620683, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Jan 2018.