Abstract
Objective
To compare the onset, duration and depth of anesthesia, postoperative pain, duration of analgesia and adverse reaction between 0.5% ropivacaine and 2% Lignocaine hydrochloride with adrenaline (1:80,000) in 40 patients having bilaterally impacted mandibular third molars.
Patients and Methods
A prospective, randomized, single blind study was carried out among 40 patients requiring surgical removal of bilaterally impacted mandibular third molars having similar “difficulty index.” The onset of action, duration and depth of anesthesia, duration of analgesia, postoperative pain and adverse reactions of 0.5% ropivacaine and 2% lignocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 adrenaline were evaluated. All patients were infiltrated intradermally with 0.5 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine as test dose to rule out any allergic reaction. The surgical extractions of the impacted third molars were done using the standard surgical procedure.
Results
0.5% Ropivacaine had higher depth of anesthesia, longer duration of action and postoperative analgesic effect than 2% Lignocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 adrenaline with no adverse effects.
Conclusion
0.5% ropivacaine is safe, efficacious, clinically acceptable and equally potent local anesthetic agent when compared to 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline in oral and maxillofacial surgery for longer duration of surgeries.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Malamed SF (2007) Handbook of local anesthesia, 6th edn. Elsevier Inc., Amsterdam
Budharapu A, Sinha R, Uppada UK, Subramanya Kumar AVSS (2015) Ropivacaine: a new local anesthetic agent in maxillofacial surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 53:451–454
Hansen TG (2004) Ropivacaine: a pharmacological review. Expert Rev Neurother 4:781–791
Pederson GW (1988) Surgical removal of tooth. In: Pederson GW (ed) Oral surgery. WB Saunders, Philadelphia
Heft M, Parkers R (1984) An experimental basis for revising the graphic rating scale for pain. Pain 19:153–161
Bali RK (2014) Textbook of exodontias and local anesthesia in dental practice, 2nd edn. Arya Medi Publishing House Pvt Ltd., New Delhi
Bennett CR (1984) Monheim’s local anesthesia and pain control in dental practice, 7th edn. CV Mosby, St. Louis
Merskey H, Bogduk N (1994) Classification of chronic pain, 2nd edn. IASP Task Force on Taxonomy IASP Press, Seattle, pp 209–214
Mishra A, Lalani Z, Kalakonda B, Krishnan P, Pandey R, Reddy K (2018) Comparative evaluation of hemodynamic, vasoconstrictive, and SpO2 variability during different stages of periodontal surgery performed using 0.5% ropivacaine or 2% lignocaine HCl (1:80,000 adrenaline) local anesthesia: a randomized, double-blind, split-mouth pilot study. J Indian Soc Periodontol 22:243–248
Ranjan R, Santhosh-Kumar SN, Singh M (2018) Comparison of efficacy of 0.75% ropivacaine and 2% lidocaine with 1:200,000 adrenaline in pain control in extraction of mandibular posterior teeth: a double-blind study. Indian J Dent Res 29:611–615
Axelsson S, Isacsson G (2004) The efficacy of ropivacaine as a dental local anesthetic. Swed Dent J 28(2):85–91
Sisk AL (1992) Long-acting local anesthetics in dentistry. Anesth Prog 39:53–60
Brkovic B, Andric M, Calasan D, Milic M, Stepic J, Vučetic M, Brajkovic D, Todorovic L (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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1831-2
McClure JH (1996) Ropivacaine. Br J Anaesth 76:300–307
Acknowledgements
I thanks Mr. Sukhvinder Singh Oberoi, Bio-statistician for his assistance with the statistical analysis of my research study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Statement
Obtained for experimentation with human subjects from patients as well as from ethical committee. (F/Ethical/1593). The study design was approved by the Board of Studies of the University.
Informed Consent
An informed consent was obtained from all the patients.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goyal, R., Sharma, P. & Bali, R. Comparative Analysis of the Anesthetic Efficacy of 0.5% Ropivacaine Versus 2% Lignocaine Hydrochloride with Adrenaline (1:80,000) for Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block in Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. 20, 234–239 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-020-01428-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-020-01428-6