ArticleJournal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine2021
Clinical efficacy of 0.75% ropivacaine vs. 2% lignocaine hydrochloride with adrenaline (1:80,000) in patients undergoing removal of bilateral maxillary third molars: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Efficacy of 0.5% Ropivacaine Versus 2% Lignocaine Hydrochloride with Adrenaline (1:80,000) in Surgical Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars with Emphasis on Depth of Anesthesia- Prospective, Randomized, Split Mouth Study.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2025Article
- Comparative Study of Local Anesthesia Techniques for Pain Management in Mandibular Third Molar Extractions.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Comparative Evaluation of the Anesthetic Efficacy of 1% Chloroprocaine Vis-a-vis 2% Lignocaine with Adrenaline (1:80,000) in Third Molar Surgery.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLignocaine with adrenaline is routinely used as a local anesthetic for dental procedures. Adrenaline was added to increase the duration of anesthesia. However, epinephrine containing a local anesthetic solution is not recommended in conditions such as advanced cardiovascular diseases and hyperthyroidism. Recently, ropivacaine has gained popularity as a long-acting anesthetic with superior outcomes. The goal of this study was to assess and compare the effectiveness of 0.75% ropivacaine alone and 2% lignocaine with adrenaline (1:80,000) in the removal of bilateral maxillary wisdom teeth using the posterior superior alveolar nerve block technique.
methodsThis was a single-blind, randomized, split-mouth, prospective study assessing 15 systemically sound outpatients who needed bilateral removal of maxillary third molars. We randomly allocated the sides and sequences of ropivacaine and lignocaine with adrenaline administration. We evaluated the efficacy of both anesthetics with regard to the onset of anesthesia, intensity of pain, variation in heart rate, and blood pressure.
resultsThe onset of anesthesia was faster with lignocaine (138 s) than with ropivacaine (168 s), with insignificant differences (p = 0.001). There was no need for additional local anesthetics in the ropivacaine group, while in the lignocaine with adrenaline group, 2 (13.3%) patients required additional anesthesia. Adequate intraoperative anesthesia was provided by ropivacaine and lignocaine solutions. No significant difference was observed in the perioperative variation in blood pressure and heart rate.
conclusionRopivacaine (0.75%) is a safe and an adrenaline-free local anesthetic option for posterior superior alveolar nerve block, which provides adequate intraoperative anesthesia and a stable hemodynamic profile for the removal of the maxillary third molar.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.