A Randomized Controlled Trail Comparing the Efficacy of 0.5% Centbucridine to 2% Lignocaine as Local Anesthetics in Dental Extractions

The development of local anesthesia in dentistry has marked the beginning of a new era in terms of pain control. Lignocaine is the most commonly used local anesthetic (LA) agent even though it has a vasodilative effect and needs to be combined with adrenaline. Centbucridine is a non-ester, non amide...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Samir Mansuri, Ahmed Bhayat, Esam Omar, Fadi Jarab, Mohammad Sami Ahmed
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2011-01-01
Series:International Journal of Dentistry
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/795047
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849409421248036864
author Samir Mansuri
Ahmed Bhayat
Esam Omar
Fadi Jarab
Mohammad Sami Ahmed
author_facet Samir Mansuri
Ahmed Bhayat
Esam Omar
Fadi Jarab
Mohammad Sami Ahmed
author_sort Samir Mansuri
collection DOAJ
description The development of local anesthesia in dentistry has marked the beginning of a new era in terms of pain control. Lignocaine is the most commonly used local anesthetic (LA) agent even though it has a vasodilative effect and needs to be combined with adrenaline. Centbucridine is a non-ester, non amide group LA and has not been comprehensively studied in the dental setting and the objective was to compare it to Lignocaine. This was a randomized study comparing the onset time, duration, depth and cardiovascular parameters between Centbucridine (0.5%) and Lignocaine (2%). The study was conducted in the dental outpatient department at the Government Dental College in India on patients attending for the extraction of lower molars. A total of 198 patients were included and there were no significant differences between the LAs except those who received Centbucridine reported a significantly longer duration of anesthesia compared to those who received Lignocaine. None of the patients reported any side effects. Centbucridine was well tolerated and its substantial duration of anesthesia could be attributed to its chemical compound. Centbucridine can be used for dental procedures and can confidently be used in patients who cannot tolerate Lignocaine or where adrenaline is contraindicated.
format Article
id doaj-art-7d2813117eaf4fdc829b78bd1d01e7ab
institution Kabale University
issn 1687-8728
1687-8736
language English
publishDate 2011-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series International Journal of Dentistry
spelling doaj-art-7d2813117eaf4fdc829b78bd1d01e7ab2025-08-20T03:35:29ZengWileyInternational Journal of Dentistry1687-87281687-87362011-01-01201110.1155/2011/795047795047A Randomized Controlled Trail Comparing the Efficacy of 0.5% Centbucridine to 2% Lignocaine as Local Anesthetics in Dental ExtractionsSamir Mansuri0Ahmed Bhayat1Esam Omar2Fadi Jarab3Mohammad Sami Ahmed4Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Hizaam Street, P.O. Box 1263, Madinah Munawarah, Saudi ArabiaDental Public Health, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Hizaam Street, P.O. Box 1263, Madinah Munawarah, Saudi ArabiaOral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Hizaam Street, P.O. Box 1263, Madinah Munawarah, Saudi ArabiaOral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Hizaam Street, P.O. Box 1263, Madinah Munawarah, Saudi ArabiaDental Public Health, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Hizaam Street, P.O. Box 1263, Madinah Munawarah, Saudi ArabiaThe development of local anesthesia in dentistry has marked the beginning of a new era in terms of pain control. Lignocaine is the most commonly used local anesthetic (LA) agent even though it has a vasodilative effect and needs to be combined with adrenaline. Centbucridine is a non-ester, non amide group LA and has not been comprehensively studied in the dental setting and the objective was to compare it to Lignocaine. This was a randomized study comparing the onset time, duration, depth and cardiovascular parameters between Centbucridine (0.5%) and Lignocaine (2%). The study was conducted in the dental outpatient department at the Government Dental College in India on patients attending for the extraction of lower molars. A total of 198 patients were included and there were no significant differences between the LAs except those who received Centbucridine reported a significantly longer duration of anesthesia compared to those who received Lignocaine. None of the patients reported any side effects. Centbucridine was well tolerated and its substantial duration of anesthesia could be attributed to its chemical compound. Centbucridine can be used for dental procedures and can confidently be used in patients who cannot tolerate Lignocaine or where adrenaline is contraindicated.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/795047
spellingShingle Samir Mansuri
Ahmed Bhayat
Esam Omar
Fadi Jarab
Mohammad Sami Ahmed
A Randomized Controlled Trail Comparing the Efficacy of 0.5% Centbucridine to 2% Lignocaine as Local Anesthetics in Dental Extractions
International Journal of Dentistry
title A Randomized Controlled Trail Comparing the Efficacy of 0.5% Centbucridine to 2% Lignocaine as Local Anesthetics in Dental Extractions
title_full A Randomized Controlled Trail Comparing the Efficacy of 0.5% Centbucridine to 2% Lignocaine as Local Anesthetics in Dental Extractions
title_fullStr A Randomized Controlled Trail Comparing the Efficacy of 0.5% Centbucridine to 2% Lignocaine as Local Anesthetics in Dental Extractions
title_full_unstemmed A Randomized Controlled Trail Comparing the Efficacy of 0.5% Centbucridine to 2% Lignocaine as Local Anesthetics in Dental Extractions
title_short A Randomized Controlled Trail Comparing the Efficacy of 0.5% Centbucridine to 2% Lignocaine as Local Anesthetics in Dental Extractions
title_sort randomized controlled trail comparing the efficacy of 0 5 centbucridine to 2 lignocaine as local anesthetics in dental extractions
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/795047
work_keys_str_mv AT samirmansuri arandomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT ahmedbhayat arandomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT esamomar arandomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT fadijarab arandomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT mohammadsamiahmed arandomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT samirmansuri randomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT ahmedbhayat randomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT esamomar randomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT fadijarab randomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions
AT mohammadsamiahmed randomizedcontrolledtrailcomparingtheefficacyof05centbucridineto2lignocaineaslocalanestheticsindentalextractions