Evaluation Of Intra-Operative Pain, Time of Onset and Duration of Action Using 2% Lignocaine With 0.5 ml Dexmedetomidine (50 Micrograms) Versus 2% Lignocaine With 1:80,000 Adrenaline in Extraction of Mandibular Molars: A Comparative Clinical In Vivo Study

Abstract

Aim: The Aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of lignocaine and dexmedetomidine vs lignocaine and adrenaline for mandibular anaesthesia in patients who are planned for mandibular molar extraction. A number of factors were examined, such as the length and onset of analgesia, the need for postoperative analgesics.

Materials And Methods: The study involves 34 individuals requiring mandibular molar extractions, selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Adhering to the Helsinki Ethical Principles, patients will be informed about the procedure, study goals, benefits, and risks. Written informed consent will be obtained. A complete case history will be collected, and a treatment plan developed after evaluation and diagnosis. Patients are divided into two groups. One group receives 2 ml of 2% Lignocaine with 0.5 ml dexmedetomidine (50 µg), and the other receives 2 ml of 2% Lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline. A coin toss determines the allocation: heads for dexmedetomidine and tails for adrenaline. The onset and duration of anaesthesia are recorded using stopwatch, and extractions are performed aseptically. Pain during the procedure is assessed using a 0–10 VAS.

Conclusion: In terms of analgesia and duration of action, this study shows that Lignocaine with Dexmedetomidine is superior to Lignocaine with Adrenaline, except for the time of onset, when Lignocaine with Adrenaline is preferred.