Background: Palatal injection of local anesthetics is the most painful injection. To obviate the need for palatal injections, local anesthetic agents with diffusibility are being investigated. Hence the present study was designed to analyze the anesthetic efficacy of 2% lidocaine hydrochloride (HCl) with 1:100,000 adrenaline and 4% articaine hydrochloride (HCl) with 1:100,000 adrenaline using single buccal infiltration for the extraction of maxillary premolars. Methods: A prospective, double-blind, crossover, randomized clinical study was performed on 60 consecutive systemically healthy patients with an age range of 15-30 years, requiring extraction of asymptomatic bilateral maxillary premolars for orthodontic purposes. They received 1ml buccal infiltration of 4% articaine HCl with 1:100,000 adrenaline on one side and 2% lidocaine HCl with 1:100,000 adrenaline on the other side. The extraction procedure on either side was scheduled 14 days apart. Parameters assessed were the time of onset of anesthesia, intraoperative discomfort, hemodynamic parameters, and the duration of analgesia. Analysis of the data was done using the Mann-Whitney test, the Wilcoxon test, the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA test, and the chi-square test. Statistical significance was established at P < 0.05. Results: Articaine showed a faster time of onset and longer duration of analgesia than lidocaine. However, the difference in the intraoperative discomfort and hemodynamic parameters was statistically insignificant. Conclusion Within the limitations of the study, it can be concluded that the extraction of maxillary premolars can be performed with a single buccal infiltration of 2% lidocaine HCl with 1:100,000 adrenaline, which is one of the most commonly used local anesthetic agent.

Intradural lumbar disc herniation (ILDH) is uncommon pathology. In present report, authors present a case of ILDH associated with dorsal herniation of the cauda equina rootlets in a 30-year-old male laborer who had chronic backache since last two years. To the best of our knowledge we are reporting this for first time. Report demonstrates the natural course of ILDH.
Adult ; Back Pain ; Cauda Equina ; Humans ; Male

Background: Pain, edema, and trismus are predictable sequelae for surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars (M3M). The present study aimed to compare the anti-phlogistic potential of bromelain and aceclofenac in the reduction of post-surgical sequalae in the extraction of impacted M3M.Method: A randomized controlled, triple-blinded clinical study included 72 patients scheduled for surgical removal of impacted M3M under local anesthesia. Randomization was performed and subjects were equally allocated to groups A (control) and B (study), who intended to receive aceclofenac and bromelain, respectively. The primary outcome variables were pain, edema, and trismus evaluated on postoperative days 2 and 7 and compared with baseline values. The secondary variables evaluated were the quantity of rescue analgesics required and the frequency of adverse effects in both groups for 7 postoperative (PO) days. Data were analyzed with a level of significance of P < 0.05. Results: Group B demonstrated a significant decrease in the severity of edema and trismus compared to group A on both PO days 2 and 7 (P < 0.001). Bromelain demonstrated similar analgesic efficacy with an insignificant difference compared to aceclofenac (P > 0.05). Conclusion The present study showed that the efficacy of bromelain was comparable to that of aceclofenac in reducing inflammatory complications following surgical removal of impacted M3M. Bromelain can be considered a safe and potent alternative to routinely used aceclofenac when addressing inflammatory outcomes after surgery.