LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,149
تعداد مقالات10,518
تعداد مشاهده مقاله45,415,626
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله11,291,431
Rajendran, Balamurugan, Jain, Surabhi, Tony, Jane. (1403). Comparing the Efficacy of 8.4% and 7.5% Buffered Lidocaine during Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar- A Split Mouth Double Blinded Randomized Controlled Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 25(3), 262-267. doi: 10.30476/dentjods.2023.98891.2115
Balamurugan Rajendran; Surabhi R Jain; Jane Belinda Tony. "Comparing the Efficacy of 8.4% and 7.5% Buffered Lidocaine during Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar- A Split Mouth Double Blinded Randomized Controlled Study". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 25, 3, 1403, 262-267. doi: 10.30476/dentjods.2023.98891.2115
Rajendran, Balamurugan, Jain, Surabhi, Tony, Jane. (1403). 'Comparing the Efficacy of 8.4% and 7.5% Buffered Lidocaine during Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar- A Split Mouth Double Blinded Randomized Controlled Study', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 25(3), pp. 262-267. doi: 10.30476/dentjods.2023.98891.2115
Rajendran, Balamurugan, Jain, Surabhi, Tony, Jane. Comparing the Efficacy of 8.4% and 7.5% Buffered Lidocaine during Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar- A Split Mouth Double Blinded Randomized Controlled Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1403; 25(3): 262-267. doi: 10.30476/dentjods.2023.98891.2115

Comparing the Efficacy of 8.4% and 7.5% Buffered Lidocaine during Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar- A Split Mouth Double Blinded Randomized Controlled Study

Journal of Dentistry
مقاله 10، دوره 25، شماره 3 - شماره پیاپی 84، آذر 2024، صفحه 262-267    اصل مقاله (348.59 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/dentjods.2023.98891.2115
نویسندگان
Balamurugan Rajendran* 1؛ Surabhi R Jain2؛ Jane Belinda Tony3
1Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon and Oral Implantologist, RYA COSMO Foundation Hospital, Chennai, India.
2Dental Surgeon, RYA COSMO Foundation Hospital, Chennai, India.
3Periodontist and Oral Implantologist, RYA COSMO Foundation Hospital, Chennai, India.
چکیده
Statement of the Problem: Conventional injection technique with adrenaline during removal of impacted third molar of mandible had proportionally increased pain during administration with slow onset of action and shorter duration of anesthesia.  
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the effective nature of 8.4% and 7.5% buffered lidocaine hydrochloride during surgical removal of mandibular impacted third molar.
Materials and Method: This prospective crossover study included 50 patients requiring bilateral removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Group I included 50 impacted mandibular third molars that were administered with 8.4% buffered lidocaine hydrochloride and group II included 50 impacted mandibular third molars were administered with 7.5% buffered lidocaine hydrochloride. The outcome variables were pain on injection, time of onset of anesthesia, and duration of action of anesthesia. The above parameters were recorded by the investigator and statistically analyzed through Chi-square test using SPSS software.
Results: Patients in group I had mild pain (1.02) and patients in group II (5.74) had moderate pain with a statistical significance of p< 0.05 for group I respectively. The mean onset of action of anesthesia in group I was 0.08 seconds and 0.59 seconds in group II (p< 0.05). The duration of anesthesia was 342.51 minutes from group I and 122.06 minutes in group II (p< 0.05) respectively.
Conclusion: Lidocaine hydrochloride buffered with 8.4 % sodium bicarbonate was found to be more effective in reduction of pain during injection, also had a faster onset of action and longer duration of the action of anesthesia when compared to 7.5% buffered lidocaine hydrochloride.

تازه های تحقیق

Balamurugan Rajendran (google scholar)

کلیدواژه‌ها
Tooth؛ Impacted؛ Lidocaine؛ Pain
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
مراجع
  • Kashyap VM, Desai R, Reddy PB, Menon S. Effect of alkalinisation of lignocaine for intraoral nerve block on pain during injection, and speed of onset of anesthesia. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 49: e72–e75.
  • Sarvela PJ, Paloheimo PJ, Nikki PH. Comparison of pH-adjusted bupivacaine 0.75% and a mixture of bupivacaine 0.75% and lidocaine 2%, both with hyaluronidase in day-case cataract surgery under regional anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 1994; 79: 35–39.
  • Pranitha V, Singh T, Dwijendra KS, Nagarjuna G, Sultana Z, Anusha K. Comparison of pain perception and latency with alkalinization of 2% lidocaine using 8.4% sodium bicarbonate: A randomized controlled study. World J Dent. 2019; 10: 454-456.
  • Hobeich P, Simon S, Schneiderman E, He J. A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of the injection pain and anesthetic onset of 2% lidocaine with 1: 100,000 epinephrine buffered with 5% and 10% sodium bicarbonate in maxillary infiltrations. J Endod. 2013; 39: 597-599.
  • Madan SG, Mehta D, Patel K, Choudhary R, Shah A, Jani MD. The exact amount of 7.5% W/V B.P sodium bicarbonate necessary for buffering local anesthetic solution- laboratory research. Int J Med Health Sci. 2014; 3: 158-162.
  • Brandis K. Alkalinisation of local anaesthetic solutions. Aust Prescr. 2011; 34: 173–175.
  • Jain TK, Jha R, Tiwari A, Agrawal N, Mali S, Sinha A et al. A Comparative study to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of buffered versus non-buffered 2% lidocaine during inferior alveolar nerve block. Cureus. 2022; 14: 1-7.
  • Agarwal A, Jithendra KD, Sinha A, Garg M, Sharma S, Singh A. To evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of sodium bicarbonate buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve blocks: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Arch Dent Med Res. 2015; 1: 17-23.
  • Christoph RA, Buchanan L, Begalla K, Schwartz S. Pain reduction in local anaesthetic administration through pH buffering. Ann Emerg Med. 1988; 17: 117-120.
  • Peterfreund RA, Datta S, Ostheimer GW. pH adjustment of local anesthetic solutions with sodium bicarbonate: laboratory evaluation of alkalinization and precipitation. Reg Anesth. 1989; 14: 265-270. 
  • Tainter ML, Throndson AH, Moose SM. Alleged clinical importance of buffered local anaesthetic solutions. J Ame Dent Assoc. 1939; 26: 920-927.
  • Saatchi M, Khademi A, Baghaei B, Noormohammadi H. Effect of Sodium Bicarbonate–buffered Lidocaine on the Success of Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block for Teeth with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Prospective, Randomized Double-blind Study. J Endo. 2015; 41: 33-35.
  • Masters JE. Randomised control trial of pH buffered lignocaine with adrenaline in outpatient operations. Br J Plas Surg. 1998; 51: 385-387.
  • Devara VM, Padma T, Rao SS. Study & Evaluate the Comparison of Plain Lignocaine and Lignocaine with Sodium Bicarbonate Effects In Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block. J Evid Based Med Healthc. 2015; 35: 5414-5425.
  • Younis I, Bhutiani RP. Taking the ‘ouch-out’- effect of buffering commercial Xylocaine on infiltration and procedure pain- a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2004; 86: 213-217.
  • Ruegg TA, Curran CR, Lamb T. Use of buffered lidocaine in bone marrow biopsies: a randomized, controlled trial. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2009; 36: 52-60.
  • Whitcomb M, Drum M, Reader A, Nusstein J, Beck MA. A prospective, randomized, double-blind study of the anesthetic efficacy of sodium bicarbonate buffered with 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in inferior alveolar nerve blocks. Anesth Prog. 2010; 57: 59–66.
  • Chaney MA, Kerby R, Reader A, Beck FM, Meyers WJ, Weaver J. An evaluation of lidocaine hydrocarbonate compared with lidocaine hydrochloride for inferior alveolar nerve block. Anesth Prog. 1991; 38:212–216.
  • DiFaizo CA, Carron H, Grosslight KR, Moscicki JC, Bolding WR, Johns RA. Comparison of pH-adjusted lidocaine solutions for epidural anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 1986; 65: 760-764.
  • Zahl K, Jordan A McGroaty J, Sorensen B, Gotta AW. Peribulbar anesthesia- effect of bicarbonate on mixtures of lidocaine, bupivacaine, and hyaluronidase with or without epinephrine. Ophthalmology. 1991; 98: 239-242.
  • Benson HT, Toleikis JR, Dixit P, Goodman I, Hill JA. Onset, intensity of blockade and somatosensory evoked potential changes of the lumbosacral dermatomes after epidural anesthesia with alkalinized lidocaine. Anesth Analog. 1997; 76: 328-332.
  • Sinnott CJ, Garfield JM, Thalhammer JG, Strichartz GR. Addition of sodium bicarbonate to lidocaine decreases the duration of peripheral nerve block in the rat. Anesthesiology. 2000; 93:1045-1052.
  • Primosch RE, Robinson L. Pain elicited during intraoral infiltration with buffered lidocaine. Am J Dent. 1996; 9: 5-10.
  • Galindo A. pH-adjusted local anesthetics: clinical experience. Reg Anesth. 1983; 8: 35-36.
  • Afolabi O, Murphy A, Chung B, Lalonde D. The effect of buffering on pain and duration of local anesthetic in the face: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Can J Plast surg. 2013; 21: 209-212.
  • Catchlove RF. The Influence of CO2 and pH on Local Anaesthetic Action. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1972; 181 298-309.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,837
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 233


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب