Maxillary Extractions With 4% Articaine, 0.5% Bupivacaine, And 2% Lignocaine: An Evidence Based Assessment Of Efficacy With Comparative Clinical Study

Background: Maxillary extractions are considered as very complicated followed with many complications. The major reasons for complication are improper dosage and choice of anesthesia. Thus, this study was conducted to find the efficacy of different percentage of anesthesia for comparing the clinical, anesthetic efficacy and post-operative complications of 4% articaine, 0.5% bupivacaine and 2% lignocaine in maxillaryextractions. Materials and Methods: Conduction of study was done in Department of Oral and maxillofacial surgery, on 100 systematically health subjects (18–75 years) who required multiple extractions in maxillary arch. Patients were labeled into three different groups (2%lignocaine, 4% articaine, 0.5% bupivacaine using the split mouth technique. Results: The results showcased that time of onset of action were significantly faster in case of 4% articaine when comparison was made to 0.5% bupivacaine and 2% lignocaine. Conclusion: Articaine usage with 4% have being proved to have better potency and efficacy in terms of onset of action with lower pain scores comparison but lignocaine still remained the gold standard local anesthetic agent in Dental practice due to its quick onset, less time of anesthesia and cost effectiveness when compared articaine and bupivacaine. Whereas bupivacaine has been proved to be more efficient in pain control and remained concentrated for majorprocedures.