Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences
Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences Login  | Users Online: 4293  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
    Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Online submission

Year : 2015  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 600-606

Efficacy of 2% mepivacaine and 2% lignocaine in the surgical extraction of mesioangular angulated bilaterally impacted third molars: A double-blind, randomized, clinical trial

Department of Periodontics, Lenora Institute of Dental Sciences, Rajanagaram, Rajamundry, Andhra Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. G Harikishan
Department of Periodontics, Lenora Institute of Dental Sciences, Rajanagaram, Rajamundry, Andhra Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0975-7406.163564

Rights and Permissions

Objective: The purpose of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to compare the anesthetic efficacy of 2% mepivacaine and 2% lidocaine (both with 1:80,000 epinephrine) for inferior alveolar nerve block in mesioangular bilaterally impacted third molar extraction. Study Design: Forty patients with mesioangular bilaterally impacted third molars were taken for the study; either 2% mepivacaine or 2% lidocaine is given in a double-blind manner. Surgery started 5 min after solution deposition. Success was defined as no or mild discomfort (visual analog scale [VAS] recordings) during the surgical procedure. Results: The mean time for onset period 4.2 min and 4.6 min (P = 0.018). The mean duration anesthesia 177.17 min 166.71 min (P = 0.085). No significant difference between the scores of pain reported by the patients by VAS and venovenous bypass treated with mepivacaine and lidocaine (P = 0.000). Slight increased postoperative analgesics required for mepivacaine group (4.000 tablets) and lidocaine group (4.170 tablets) (P = 0.335). The sharp increase of pulse rate with respect to both the solutions at 5 min after postinjection of local anesthetics. However, there was no statically significant difference in systolic and diastolic blood (P = 0.681) and (P = 0.270). Conclusion: Lidocaine and mepivacaine with the same vasoconstrictor have similar action and both solutions are effective in surgical procedures. There were also no significant differences between them in relation to the intensity of postoperative pain.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded112    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal