Clinical Research Directory

"Comparison of Buffered Versus Non-Buffered Local Anesthetic in Patients With Inflamed Tissues for Pain Perception, Onset, Duration and Adverse Effects"

Sponsor: King Edward Medical University

Summary

This study aims to determine whether buffered or non-buffered local anesthetic (LA) is more effective and safer for managing pain in patients with inflamed tissues undergoing surgical procedures. Local anesthetics are widely used to reduce pain, but their effectiveness may vary, particularly in inflamed tissues where achieving adequate anesthesia can be challenging. In this study, patients will be divided into two groups: one group will receive buffered local anesthetic, and the other will receive non-buffered local anesthetic. The study will compare the level of pain experienced during injection and the procedure, how quickly the anesthetic takes effect, and how long the numbness lasts. In addition, any side effects such as dizziness, nausea, vomiting, allergic reactions, or heart-related complications will be carefully monitored. The study will also examine whether the presence of co-morbid conditions (such as diabetes, hypertension, or other chronic illnesses) affects the outcomes of both types of anesthetics. The main question this study seeks to answer is whether buffered local anesthetic provides better pain relief, faster onset, longer duration, and fewer side effects compared to non-buffered local anesthetic, and how these outcomes differ in patients with and without co-morbid conditions. The findings may help improve pain management practices and guide healthcare providers in selecting the most appropriate anesthetic for different patient groups.

Key Details

Conditions

Interventions