Cargando…

Comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth

BACKGROUND: The management of pain during extraction of mandibular third molars is an important requisite to achieve patient comfort and to obtain desired result in an effective manner. There are various anesthetics that can be used to achieve regional or local anesthetic effect in this regard. AIM:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nazeer, Jazib, Kumari, Soni, Haidry, Nazia, Kulkarni, Pranay, Aastha, Gautam, Ashesh, Gupta, Preeti
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8386260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34483583
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/njms.NJMS_14_20
_version_ 1783742226490195968
author Nazeer, Jazib
Kumari, Soni
Haidry, Nazia
Kulkarni, Pranay
Aastha,
Gautam, Ashesh
Gupta, Preeti
author_facet Nazeer, Jazib
Kumari, Soni
Haidry, Nazia
Kulkarni, Pranay
Aastha,
Gautam, Ashesh
Gupta, Preeti
author_sort Nazeer, Jazib
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The management of pain during extraction of mandibular third molars is an important requisite to achieve patient comfort and to obtain desired result in an effective manner. There are various anesthetics that can be used to achieve regional or local anesthetic effect in this regard. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline, 0.75% ropivacaine and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional study included 300 study participants indicated for mandibular third molar surgical extractions. The study subjects were categorized into three broad groups - (a) Group I (n = 100): Third molar extractions performed using 2% Lignocaine with 1: 80,000 epinephrine; (b) Group II (n = 100): This group included subjects who underwent extractions of mandibular third molars using 0.75% ropivacaine and (c) Group III (n = 100): This group included patients who underwent extractions of mandibular third molars with bupivacaine. Inclusion criteria were: (a) partially impacted mandibular third molars which were symptomatic; (b) written informed consent. Exclusion criteria were – (a) any systemic diseases and/or undergoing any medication for same; (b) subjects not willing for extraction after clinical and radiographic examination and opinion and (c) subjects undergoing orthodontic therapy. Subject response for pain was recorded using – (a) visual analog scale (VAS) and (b) Verbal Rating scale (VRS). Postoperative pain was assessed using requirement of analgesics after extraction. SPSS version 21.0 was employed as statistical software. Statistical tool used was the Analysis of Variance test which was used for determining statistical significance which was set at a P value of lesser than 0.05 (significant). RESULTS: On analysis of visual analog scale (VAS), it was observed that in Group I (2% Lignocaine with 1:80,000), no pain during the extraction procedure was demonstrated in 30 study participants while minimal or less pain was present in 70 patients, while in Group II (0.75% ropivacaine), 90 patients presented with no pain while ten patients had presented with minimal amount of pain during tooth extraction. While on the other hand, Group III patients whose mandibular third molars were extracted using local anesthesia by injecting bupivacaine, lack of any pain was observed in 69 patients while minimal pain was noted in 31 individuals. While making statistical comparison between three groups, a significant P = 0.03 was observed. Also, postoperative pain was noted in 60% of cases who underwent extraction using 2% lignocaine (Group I), 10% patients who had third molar extractions under Bupivacaine anesthesia presented with pain whereas none of the patients (0%), demonstrated the presence of pain following third molar extraction. CONCLUSION: 0.75% Ropivacaine is the most effective local anesthetic agent that can be used for extracting mandibular third molars due to its effective pain control both during and following the procedure when compared to 2% lignocaine and bupivacaine.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8386260
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83862602021-09-03 Comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth Nazeer, Jazib Kumari, Soni Haidry, Nazia Kulkarni, Pranay Aastha, Gautam, Ashesh Gupta, Preeti Natl J Maxillofac Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: The management of pain during extraction of mandibular third molars is an important requisite to achieve patient comfort and to obtain desired result in an effective manner. There are various anesthetics that can be used to achieve regional or local anesthetic effect in this regard. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline, 0.75% ropivacaine and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional study included 300 study participants indicated for mandibular third molar surgical extractions. The study subjects were categorized into three broad groups - (a) Group I (n = 100): Third molar extractions performed using 2% Lignocaine with 1: 80,000 epinephrine; (b) Group II (n = 100): This group included subjects who underwent extractions of mandibular third molars using 0.75% ropivacaine and (c) Group III (n = 100): This group included patients who underwent extractions of mandibular third molars with bupivacaine. Inclusion criteria were: (a) partially impacted mandibular third molars which were symptomatic; (b) written informed consent. Exclusion criteria were – (a) any systemic diseases and/or undergoing any medication for same; (b) subjects not willing for extraction after clinical and radiographic examination and opinion and (c) subjects undergoing orthodontic therapy. Subject response for pain was recorded using – (a) visual analog scale (VAS) and (b) Verbal Rating scale (VRS). Postoperative pain was assessed using requirement of analgesics after extraction. SPSS version 21.0 was employed as statistical software. Statistical tool used was the Analysis of Variance test which was used for determining statistical significance which was set at a P value of lesser than 0.05 (significant). RESULTS: On analysis of visual analog scale (VAS), it was observed that in Group I (2% Lignocaine with 1:80,000), no pain during the extraction procedure was demonstrated in 30 study participants while minimal or less pain was present in 70 patients, while in Group II (0.75% ropivacaine), 90 patients presented with no pain while ten patients had presented with minimal amount of pain during tooth extraction. While on the other hand, Group III patients whose mandibular third molars were extracted using local anesthesia by injecting bupivacaine, lack of any pain was observed in 69 patients while minimal pain was noted in 31 individuals. While making statistical comparison between three groups, a significant P = 0.03 was observed. Also, postoperative pain was noted in 60% of cases who underwent extraction using 2% lignocaine (Group I), 10% patients who had third molar extractions under Bupivacaine anesthesia presented with pain whereas none of the patients (0%), demonstrated the presence of pain following third molar extraction. CONCLUSION: 0.75% Ropivacaine is the most effective local anesthetic agent that can be used for extracting mandibular third molars due to its effective pain control both during and following the procedure when compared to 2% lignocaine and bupivacaine. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021 2021-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8386260/ /pubmed/34483583 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/njms.NJMS_14_20 Text en Copyright: © 2021 National Journal of Maxillofacial Surgery https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Nazeer, Jazib
Kumari, Soni
Haidry, Nazia
Kulkarni, Pranay
Aastha,
Gautam, Ashesh
Gupta, Preeti
Comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth
title Comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth
title_full Comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth
title_fullStr Comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth
title_short Comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth
title_sort comparison of efficacy of lignocaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine in pain control during extraction of mandibular posterior teeth
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8386260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34483583
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/njms.NJMS_14_20
work_keys_str_mv AT nazeerjazib comparisonofefficacyoflignocaineropivacaineandbupivacaineinpaincontrolduringextractionofmandibularposteriorteeth
AT kumarisoni comparisonofefficacyoflignocaineropivacaineandbupivacaineinpaincontrolduringextractionofmandibularposteriorteeth
AT haidrynazia comparisonofefficacyoflignocaineropivacaineandbupivacaineinpaincontrolduringextractionofmandibularposteriorteeth
AT kulkarnipranay comparisonofefficacyoflignocaineropivacaineandbupivacaineinpaincontrolduringextractionofmandibularposteriorteeth
AT aastha comparisonofefficacyoflignocaineropivacaineandbupivacaineinpaincontrolduringextractionofmandibularposteriorteeth
AT gautamashesh comparisonofefficacyoflignocaineropivacaineandbupivacaineinpaincontrolduringextractionofmandibularposteriorteeth
AT guptapreeti comparisonofefficacyoflignocaineropivacaineandbupivacaineinpaincontrolduringextractionofmandibularposteriorteeth