Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology (Jan 2018)

Comparative evaluation of hemodynamic, vasoconstrictive, and SpO2variability during different stages of periodontal surgery performed using 0.5% ropivacaine or 2% lignocaine HCl (1:80,000 adrenaline) local anesthesia: A randomized, double-blind, split-mouth pilot study

  • Ashank Mishra,
  • Zohra Lalani,
  • Butchibabu Kalakonda,
  • Preeti Krishnan,
  • Ruchi Pandey,
  • Krishnajaneya Reddy

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_18_18
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 22, no. 3
pp. 243 – 248

Abstract

Read online

Aim: The aim of this study is to compare anesthetic, hemodynamic, vasoconstrictive, and SpO2variability of 0.5% ropivacaine to the “gold standard” lignocaine (2%) with epinephrine (1:80,000) during periodontal surgery. Materials and Methods: A total of 20 systemically healthy controls meeting the inclusion criteria were selected from the Outpatient Department of Sri Sai College of Dental Surgery. Preoperatively, all participants were infiltrated with 0.5 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine intradermally as test solution to record any allergic reaction. Open flap debridement was performed using local anesthesia containing 2% lignocaine hydrochloride with 1:80,000 epinephrine or 0.5% ropivacaine. Recordings were made of the time of onset, duration of action, the intensity, and depth of anesthesia and various hemodynamic changes throughout the surgical procedure. In addition, blood loss volume and postoperative pain were also assessed. Results: Ropivacaine showed statistically longer duration of action (mean±SD =5.3±0.71 hrs) than lignocaine with epinephrine (mean=2.14±0.98 hrs). Blood loss during flap surgery was comparatively less when performed under ropivacaine. No statistical differences were observed in systolic BP, diastolic BP, SpO2 and heart rate during different stages of periodontal surgery between either of the local anesthetic agents Conclusion: Ropivacaine demonstrates comparable efficacy as lignocaine with added advantage of longer duration of action and superior postoperative pain control. No adverse events from this newer anesthetic were noted, and hence, it can be used safely as a viable local anesthetic for periodontal surgical procedures.

Keywords