Comparing the efficacy of adrenaline, clonidine, and dexmedetomidine in enhancing local anesthesia for impacted third molar extraction: a randomized controlled trial
- PMID: 39118811
- PMCID: PMC11304038
- DOI: 10.17245/jdapm.2024.24.4.285
Comparing the efficacy of adrenaline, clonidine, and dexmedetomidine in enhancing local anesthesia for impacted third molar extraction: a randomized controlled trial
Abstract
Background: In human dentition, the most commonly impacted teeth are the mandibular third molars (M3M). The removal or extraction of these teeth often causes anxiety in patients due to the perceived pain involved in the process. Therefore, pain must be effectively managed using anesthesia. The use of newer local anesthetic drugs can help minimize side effects and drug interactions. Traditionally, adrenaline is used as a vasoconstrictor along with lignocaine. When combined with lignocaine, the alpha agonists dexmedetomidine and clonidine can extend the duration of anesthesia, thereby reducing the need for additional pain-relieving medications.
Methods: This study used a randomized, triple-blind, parallel-arm design. Sixty patients were screened, and 45 systemically healthy patients requiring unilateral surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars with similar difficulty (moderate-to-difficult according to the Modified Pederson's Index) were included in the study. Patients were allocated into three groups as follows: Group A: 2% Lignocaine Hydrochloride with 1:100,000 Adrenaline, Group C: 2% Lignocaine Hydrochloride with 15 µg/mL Clonidine, and Group D: 2% Lignocaine Hydrochloride with 1 µg/mL Dexmedetomidine. The evaluated parameters were the time of onset of anesthesia, depth of anesthesia, hemodynamic parameters, and duration of postoperative analgesia.
Results: Group D had a faster onset of action and prolonged duration of postoperative analgesia compared with Groups A and C. No statistically significant differences were observed between the three groups in terms of the depth of anesthesia and hemodynamic parameters.
Conclusion: Group D exhibited a significantly more rapid onset of anesthesia than Groups A and C, and the postoperative analgesic effect in Group D was significantly prolonged (7.22 hours) compared with that in Groups A (4.54 hours) and C (2.1 hours). Patients receiving the Group D solution experienced an extended period of comfort without the need for analgesics for up to 7.22 hours post-procedure.
Keywords: Analgesia; Duration; Hemodynamic Parameters; Impacted Tooth; Local Anesthesia; Mandible; Onset Time; Pain Management; Postoperative Pain; Third Molar.
Copyright © 2024 Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine.
Conflict of interest statement
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Comparative Evaluation of Effectiveness of 2% Lignocaine Hydrochloride with Clonidine Hydrochloride versus 2% Lignocaine Hydrochloride with Adrenaline Bitartrate as Local Anesthetic for Adult Patients Undergoing Surgical Extraction of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study.Contemp Clin Dent. 2021 Jul-Sep;12(3):308-312. doi: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_665_20. Epub 2021 Sep 21. Contemp Clin Dent. 2021. PMID: 34759690 Free PMC article.
-
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. 2021 Jun;20(2):234-239. doi: 10.1007/s12663-020-01428-6. Epub 2020 Jul 31. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2021. PMID: 33927491 Free PMC article.
-
A Comparative Study Evaluating the Efficacy of Lignocaine and Dexmedetomidine with Lignocaine and Adrenaline in Third Molar Surgery.J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2022 Jun;21(2):634-638. doi: 10.1007/s12663-020-01477-x. Epub 2020 Nov 9. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2022. PMID: 35712398 Free PMC article.
-
Clonidine versus Adrenaline as an Adjunct to Lignocaine on Haemodynamic Parameters during Nerve Block for Third Molar Surgical Removal - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2022 Jul-Dec;12(2):203-211. doi: 10.4103/ams.ams_149_22. Epub 2023 Jan 10. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2022. PMID: 36874780 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Anesthetic and analgesic efficacy of bupivacaine in mandibular third molar surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Quintessence Int. 2020;51(7):586-597. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.a44633. Quintessence Int. 2020. PMID: 32500866
Cited by
-
Biochemical strategies for opioid-sparing pain management in the operating room.Biochem Biophys Rep. 2025 Jan 25;41:101927. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrep.2025.101927. eCollection 2025 Mar. Biochem Biophys Rep. 2025. PMID: 40134940 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of intravenous lignocaine, dexmedetomidine, and lignocaine-dexmedetomidine infusion for attenuation of pain response to skull pin application in patients of intracranial tumours: A placebo-controlled, double-blinded, randomised comparative study.Indian J Anaesth. 2025 Apr;69(4):350-357. doi: 10.4103/ija.ija_266_24. Epub 2025 Mar 13. Indian J Anaesth. 2025. PMID: 40687975 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Mercier P, Precious D. Risks and benefits of removal of impacted third molars. A critical review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992 Feb;21:17–27. - PubMed
-
- Oginni FO, Ugboko VI, Assam E, Ogunbodede EO. Postoperative complaints following impacted mandibular third molar surgery in Ile-Ife, Nigeria. SADJ. 2002;57:264–268. - PubMed
-
- Panni M, Segal S. New local anesthetics. Are they worth the cost? Anesthesiol Clin North Am. 2003;21:19–38. - PubMed
-
- Kroin JS, Buvanendran A, Williams DK, Wagenaar B, Moric M, Tuman KJ, et al. Local anesthetic sciatic nerve block and nerve fiber damage in diabetic rats. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2010;35:343–350. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources