Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Evaluation of the Anesthetic Efficacy of 1% Chloroprocaine Vis-a-vis 2% Lignocaine with Adrenaline (1:80,000) in Third Molar Surgery

  • COMPARATIVE STUDY
  • Published:
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of 1% chloroprocaine in comparison to 2% lignocaine hydrochloride and adrenaline (1:80,000) in third molar surgery.

Materials and Methods

A randomized single-blind trial comprising of 30 healthy patients requiring bilateral extraction of impacted lower third molars with similar difficulty index was undertaken. A test dose was administered to all patients with subdermal infiltration of 1% chloroprocaine with 0.5 ml. A classic inferior alveolar and long buccal nerve block was given using 1% chloroprocaine 2 ml on one side and 2% lignocaine hydrochloride 2 ml with adrenaline on the other side. The time to onset and duration of action were noted. Pain during the surgical intervention, need for additional local anesthetic solution during the surgical intervention and the hemodynamic changes associated with the administration of the drugs were monitored.

Results

Chloroprocaine had an early onset of action with a mean of 1.17 ± 0.55 min as compared to lignocaine 4.2 ± 0.48 min. Patients administered with lignocaine experienced less postoperative pain compared with chloroprocaine since the duration of action of chloroprocaine was lesser than that of lignocaine. Additional amount of LA was required when chloroprocaine was administered as compared to lignocaine. Chloroprocaine alone did not cause any appreciable changes in the hemodynamics, but lignocaine with adrenaline caused a transient increase in arterial pressure and heart rate 2 min following the administration. It was also observed that more blood was lost following chloroprocaine administration than with lignocaine.

Conclusion

Chloroprocaine has a rapid onset of action and short duration of action with minimal effects on the hemodynamic changes than lignocaine. Considering the fact that it is a safe drug with no effects of the cardiovascular system it can be advocated that Chloroprocaine can be used as an effective local anesthetic agent for performing oral and maxillofacial surgical interventions of short duration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Datta S, Corke BC, Alper MH, Brown WU Jr, Ostheimer GW, Weiss JB (1980) Epidural anesthesia for cesarean section: a comparison of bupivacaine, chloroprocaine, and etidocaine. J Anesthesiol 52(1):48–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Budharapu A, Sinha R, Uppada UK, A.V.S.S. Subramanya Kumar. Ropivacaine: A new local anaesthetic agent in maxillofacial Surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015;(53):451–454

  3. Weiss RR, Halevy S, Almonte RO, Gundersen K, Hinsvark ON, O’Brien JE (1983) Comparison of lidocaine and 2-chloroprocaine in paracervical block: clinical effects and drug concentrations in mother and child. J Anesth Analg 62(2):168–173

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Philipson EH, Kuhnert BR, Syracuse CD (1985) Fetal acidosis, 2-chloroprocaine, and epidural anesthesia for cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 151(3):322–324

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. McLean ME, Wayman BE, Mayhew RB (1992) Duration of anesthesia using the eriodontal ligament injection: a comparison of bupivacaine to lidocaine. Anesth Pain Control Dent 1(4):207–213

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kouri ME, Kopacz DJ (2004) Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: a comparison with lidocaine in volunteers. J Anesth Analg 98(1):75–80

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Casati A, Danelli G, Berti M, Fioro A, Fanelli A, Benassi C et al (2006) Intrathecal 2-chloroprocaine for lower limb outpatient surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, clinical evaluation. J Anesth Analg 103(1):234–238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Camponovo C, Wulf H, Ghisi D, Fanelli A, Riva T, Cristina D et al (2014) Intrathecal 1% 2‐chloroprocaine vs. 0.5% bupivacaine in ambulatory surgery: a prospective, observer‐blinded, randomised, controlled trial. J Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 58(5):560–566

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Teunkens A, Vermeulen K, Van Gerven E, Fieuws S, Van de Velde M, Rex S (2016) Comparison of 2-chloroprocaine, bupivacaine, and lidocaine for spinal anesthesia in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy in an outpatient setting: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. J Reg Anesth Pain Med 41(5):576–583

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Saralaya S, Adirajaiah SB, Anehosur V (2019) 4% articaine and 2% lignocaine for surgical removal of third molar by mandibular nerve block: a randomized clinical trial for efficacy and safety. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 18(3):405–411

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Breebaart MB, Teune A, Sermeus LA, Vercauteren MP (2014) Intrathecal chloroprocaine vs. lidocaine in day-case surgery: recovery, discharge and effect of pre-hydration on micturition. J Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 58(2):206–213

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bjornestad E, Iversen OL, Raeder J (2006) Similar onset time of 2-chloroprocaine and lidocaine+ epinephrine for epidural anesthesia for elective Cesarean section. J Acta anaesthesiol scand 50(3):358–363

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kamal SM (2012) Comparison of ropivacaine and lidocaine sensory and motor block and post-operative analgesic requirement in intra-venous regional anesthesia. J Asian Acad Manag 10(2):399–413

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ravi S, Krishna HM (2022) Comparison of spinal anaesthesia with isobaric chloroprocaine and general anaesthesia for short duration ambulatory urological procedures. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 38(1):91–96

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Kakade AN, Joshi SS, Naik CS, Mhatre BV, Ansari A (2021) Clinical efficacy of 0.5% ropivacaine vs. 2% lignocaine hydrochloride with adrenaline (1: 80,000) in patients undergoing removal of bilateral maxillary third molars: a randomized controlled trial. J Dent Anesth Pain Med 21(5):451–459

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Brkovic B, Andric M, Calasan D, Milic M, Stepic J, Vucetic M et al (2017) Efficacy and safety of 1% ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia after lower third molar surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical study. Clin Oral Investig 21(3):779–785

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ranjan R, Kumar SS, Singh M (2018) Comparison of efficacy of 0.75% ropivacaine and % lidocaine with 1: 200,000 adrenaline in pain control in extraction of mandibular posterior teeth: a double-blind study. Indian J Dent Res 29(5):611

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wesselink E, Janssen-van den Hurk G, van der Vegt R, Slagt C, van der Aa J, Franssen E, et al. Chloroprocaine versus prilocaine for spinal anesthesia in ambulatory knee arthroscopy: a double-blind randomized trial. J Reg Anesth & Pain Med 2019;44(10):944–9

  19. Ghisi D, Boschetto G, Spinelli AM, Giannone S, Frugiuele J, Ciccarello M et al (2021) Spinal anesthesia with Chloroprocaine HCl 1% for elective lower limb procedures of short duration: a prospective, randomised, observer-blind study in adult patients. J Bio Med Central Anesthesiol 21(1):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  20. Neal JA, Welch TB, Halliday RW (1993) Analysis of the analgesic efficacy and cost effective use of long-acting local anesthetics in outpatient third molar surgery. J Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 75(3):283–285

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lacasse MA, Roy JD, Forget J, Vandenbroucke F, Seal RF, Beaulieu D et al (2011) Comparison of bupivacaine and 2-chloroprocaine for spinal anesthesia for outpatient surgery: a double-blind randomized trial. Can J Anesth 58(4):384–391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Camponovo C, Wulf H, Ghisi D, Fanelli A, Riva T, Cristina D et al (2014) Intrathecal 1% 2-chloroprocaine vs. 0.5% bupivacaine in ambulatory surgery: a prospective, observer-blinded, randomised, controlled trial. J Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 58(5):560–566

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Self-funded.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sri Sai College of Dental Surgery, Vikarabad, India

    T. Akhil Kumar, Prabhat Tiwari & Dushyanth Paul

  2. Department Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Saveetha Dental College, Chennai, India

    Uday Kiran Uppada

Authors
  1. T. Akhil Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Uday Kiran Uppada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Prabhat Tiwari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dushyanth Paul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Uday Kiran Uppada.

Ethics declarations

Inform Consent

Patient consent taken.

Ethical Clearance

Institutional ethical clearance obtained.

Conflict of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akhil Kumar, T., Uppada, U.K., Tiwari, P. et al. Comparative Evaluation of the Anesthetic Efficacy of 1% Chloroprocaine Vis-a-vis 2% Lignocaine with Adrenaline (1:80,000) in Third Molar Surgery. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-023-01989-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-023-01989-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation