RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Lignocaine is a commonly used local anaesthetic in dental practice. Many practitioners use adrenaline (epinephrine) as additive with lignocaine, and some have used clonidine, instead of adrenaline. Both having benefits and limitations. AIMS: Hence a study was undertaken in our department to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of using (plain lidocaine local anaesthetic) versus (lidocaine with adrenaline as additive) versus (lidocaine with clonidine as additive). STUDY DESIGN: Randomised, prospective, double blind study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy five patients requiring extraction of maxillary molar teeth who fall under ASA I category were included and randomly divided into group - I (n=25) (Lignocaine), group - II (n=25) (Lignocaine ± Adrenaline) and group - III (n=25) (Lignocaine ± Clonidine). The observations recorded were, time of onset of anaesthesia, hemodynamic parameters, blood loss during procedure and duration of post operative analgesia. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS 16 software. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was seen in blood loss, being higher in group I and duration of anaesthesia, being shortest in group I. There was no statistical difference between the three groups amongst other parameters. CONCLUSION: Adrenaline at 10 µg/ml and clonidine at 15 µg/ml can be safely used as additives with lignocaine, in maxillary infiltration anaesthesia for dental extraction; with addition of either of these two drugs, having an equal advantage over use of plain lignocaine; in terms of lower blood loss and longer duration of anaesthesia; but, with no difference in the onset of anaesthesia and with no significant hemodynamic changes.