Buffered versus Non-buffered Local Anaesthesia in Minor Oral Surgery - A Comparative Study.

INTRODUCTION

Commercially available local anaesthetics are acidic solutions associated with the vasopressor sting on injection, relatively slower onset of action and pain during palatal injections. The above drawbacks can be addressed by anaesthetic buffering. This prospective study was aimed at comparing the efficacy of buffered and non-buffered local anaesthesia in the extraction of grossly decayed maxillary molar teeth in relation to pain on local infiltration, onset and duration of action of local anaesthesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective randomised controlled trial done on 100 patients who required bilateral extraction of maxillary molar teeth. In the study group, patients were given buffered local anaesthesia (which was prepared by mixing 2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline and 8.4% sodium bicarbonate) before extraction. In the control group, non-buffered local anaesthesia (2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline) was given before extraction.

RESULTS

Statistical data confirmed that buffering reduces pain on infiltration, decreases the onset and increases the duration of action of the local anaesthesia compared to non-buffered local anaesthesia. All the parameters measured were statistically significant ( = 0.001).

DISCUSSION

The study concludes that buffered local anaesthesia was more beneficial than non-buffered local anaesthesia in reducing pain on injection, providing a quicker onset of local anaesthesia and increasing the duration of action of the local anaesthesia. Buffering is a safe, easy and efficient process and should be routinely followed to provide a better experience to the patients.