Efficacy of intraosseous saline injection for pain management during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars: a randomized double-blinded clinical trial.

Background: Surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars is the most common procedure performed by oral surgeons. The procedure cannot be performed effectively without achieving profound anesthesia. During this procedure, patients may feel pain during surgical bone removal (at the cancellous level) or during splitting and luxation of the tooth, despite administration of routine nerve blocks. Administration of intraosseous (IO) lignocaine injections during third molar surgeries to provide effective anesthesia for pain alleviation has been documented. However, whether the anesthetic effect of lignocaine is the only reason for pain alleviation when administered intraosseously remains unclear. This conundrum motivated us to assess the efficacy of IO normal saline versus lignocaine injections during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of IO normal saline as a viable alternative or adjunct to lignocaine for alleviation of intraoperative pain during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, interventional study included 160 patients who underwent surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars and experienced pain during surgical removal of the buccal bone or sectioning and luxation of the tooth. The participants were divided into two groups: the study group, which included patients who would receive IO saline injections, and the control group, which included patients who would receive IO lignocaine injections. Patients were asked to complete a visual analog pain scale (VAPS) at baseline and after receiving the IO injections. Results: Of the 160 patients included in this study, 80 received IO lignocaine (control group), whereas 80 received IO saline (study group) following randomization. The baseline VAPS score of the patients and controls was 5.71 ± 1.33 and 5.68 ± 1.21, respectively. The difference between the baseline VAPS scores of the two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference between the numbers of patients who experienced pain relief following administration of IO lignocaine (n=74) versus saline (n=69) was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference between VAPS scores measured after IO injection in both groups was not statistically significant (P >0.05) (1.05 ± 1.20 for the control group vs. 1.72 ± 1.56 for the study group). Conclusion: The study demonstrates that IO injection of normal saline is as effective as lignocaine in alleviating pain during surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars and can be used as an effective adjunct to conventional lignocaine injection.