A Prospective, Randomized Double-Blinded Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of Buffered Local Anesthetics in Infected and Inflamed Pulp and Periapical Tissues
- 1 Downloads
The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of sodium bicarbonate as an additive alkalizing agent to local anesthetic solutions in inflamed and infected pulpal and periapical tissues.
Type of Study
A prospective, randomized crossover double-blinded study was carried out in a university-affiliated hospital in Chennai.
Materials and Methods
A randomized crossover double-blinded study was designed wherein ninety-six patients were enrolled for the study. 1.8 ml of 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 adrenaline was administered. The latency time period was found to be 5–10 min and extraction was attempted. During extraction, if the patient experienced pain, 0.5 ml of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate was injected into the previously injected local anesthesia site. A time period of 3 min was allowed for the alkalinization to occur. Extraction was carried out only when the patient did not complain of pain. Pain score was assessed before and after administration of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate using visual analog scale. Pulse rate at the baseline, before and after administration of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate, was recorded and the pain scale values were correlated with pulse rate.
It was found that there was a significant decrease in pain after injecting buffered local anesthetics (p < 0.1). Pain score before injecting sodium bicarbonate was higher when compared to post-injection of sodium bicarbonate. There was also significant reduction in pulse rate following the administration of sodium bicarbonate.
Buffered 2% lignocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine had early onset of anesthesia when compared to unbuffered form. Injecting 2% buffered lignocaine pain was significantly reduced during extraction in the teeth.
KeywordsBuffered local anesthesia Local anesthesia Pain Sodium bicarbonate Visual analog scale
- 1.Hutchins HS, Young FA, Lackland DT, Fishburne CP (1997) The effectiveness of topical anesthesia and vibration in alleviating the pain of oral injections. Anesth Prog 44(3):87–89Google Scholar
- 2.Tu Y, Piascik M, Abel PW, Yagiela JA, Dowd FJ, Johnson BS, Mariotti AJ, Neidle EA (eds) (2011) Pharmacology and therapeutics for dentistry, 6th edn. Mosby Elsevier, St. Louis, pp 91–105Google Scholar
- 3.Malamed S (2011) Buffering local anesthetics in dentisry. In: The Pulse of the Montana State Nurses' Association, Vol 44(1)Google Scholar
- 4.Malamed S (2012) Handbook of local anesthesia, 6th edn. Mosby, St. LouisGoogle Scholar
- 6.Metzinger SE, Bailey DJ, Boyce RG (1992) Local anesthesia in rhinoplasty: a new twist? Ear Nose Throat J 71:405–406Google Scholar
- 9.Primosch RE, Robinson I (1996) Pain elicited during intraoral infiltration with buffered lidocaine. Am J Dent 9(1):5Google Scholar
- 18.Benson HT, Toleikis JR, Dixit P, Goodman I, Hill JA (1993) Onset, intensity of blockade and somato sensory evoked potential changes of the lumbo sacral dermatomes after epidural anesthesia with alkalinized lidocaine. Anesth Analg 76:328–332Google Scholar
- 21.Chaney MA, Kerby R, Reader A, Beck FM, Meyers WJ, Weaver J (1991) An evaluation of lidocaine hydrocarbonate compared with lidocaine hydrochloride for inferior alveolar nerve block. Anesth Prog 38:212–216Google Scholar
- 23.Galindo A (1983) pH-adjusted local anesthetics: clinical experience. Reg Anesth 8:35–36Google Scholar