A comparison between topical and retrobulbar anesthesia in 27-gauge vitrectomy for vitreous floaters: a randomized controlled trial.
ABSTRACT: To compare the safety and efficacy of topical anesthesia versus retrobulbar anesthesia in 27-gauge pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for vitreous floaters.30 patients with vitreous floaters were randomized into Group T (topical anesthesia, proparacaine eye drop) and Group R (retrobulbar anesthesia), and underwent 27-gauge PPV. A 5-point visual analogue pain scale (VAPS) was used to assess patients' pain experience of anesthesia and surgery procedure (during surgery, 2 h and 1 day after surgery).The VAPS of anesthesia procedure was 1.27?±?0.59 for patients in Group R, while it was all 0 for patients in Group T (p?
Project description:Purpose:To report the surgical outcomes of 27-gauge pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for symptomatic vitreous floaters. Methods:47 eyes of 47 patients (39 males, 83.0%) with symptomatic vitreous floaters who underwent 27-gauge PPV and followed up for more than 6 months were included. The mean age was 34.7?±?13.5 years. Results:No operative complication occurred. At first day postoperatively, the intraocular pressure (IOP) was significantly lower than that at other time points (8.6?±?2.7?mmHg, p < 0.001). 28 (59.6%) eyes had transient hypotony (IOP?<?8?mmHg). All were recovered within 1 week postoperatively. The BCVA of 41 eyes (41/47, 87.2%) remained unchanged or improved. Postoperative complications occurred in two eyes: one (2.1%) had endophthalmitis and one (2.1%) had retinal detachment. No clinical significant cataract was observed in the 42 postoperative phakic eyes. 91.5% of the patients were satisfied with the surgery outcome. Besides, 91.3% of the patients felt that the floaters were removed completely or only had an acceptable residual. Conclusion:Visual acuity of most patients remained unchanged or improved following 27-gague pars plana vitrectomy for symptomatic vitreous floaters, resulting in high patient satisfaction. However, this treatment should be performed with great caution since severe postoperative complications may still occur. This trial is registered with NCT03049163.
Project description:Background:The aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of retrobulbar block versus intraoperative ketamine infusion in eye enucleation or evisceration under general anesthesia. Materials and Methods:Forty-five patients belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I and II undergoing eye enucleation or evisceration were randomly allocated to three equal groups (15 patients each). General anesthesia was used as the standardized technique in all patients. Group R received a single retrobulbar injection, Group K received intravenous ketamine infusion, and Group C received normal saline with the same rate of ketamine infusion. Intraoperative heart rate and mean arterial pressure, recovery time, postoperative pain score, time to first rescue analgesic, number of patients who required rescue analgesia, and any adverse events were reported. Results:Postoperative pain Visual Analog Scale was significantly lower in R and K groups in comparison to the C group and was significantly higher in K than R group at 3, 6, 12, and 24 h. In addition, the time to first rescue analgesic was significantly longer in R group (429 ± 54 min) than that in K group (272 ± 34 min), but compared to both groups, it was longer in C group (52 ± 7 min). In K group, the recovery time was longer with higher sedation score in comparison to the other two groups. Conclusions:Single retrobulbar injection and low-dose ketamine infusion are safe and effective when used as adjuvants to general anesthesia, but retrobulbar block provides better control of postoperative pain with prolonged time to first rescue analgesic and reduced analgesic consumption.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cerebral aneurysm surgery has significant mortality and morbidity rate. Inflammation plays a key role in the pathogenesis of intracranial aneurysms, their rupture, subarachnoid hemorrhage and neurologic complications. Proinflammatory cytokine level in blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is an indicator of inflammatory response. Cytokines contribute to secondary brain injury and can worsen the outcome of the treatment. Lidocaine is local anesthetic that can be applied in neurosurgery as regional anesthesia of the scalp and as topical anesthesia of the throat before direct laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Besides analgesic, lidocaine has systemic anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effect.Primary aim of this trial is to determine the influence of local anesthesia with lidocaine on the perioperative levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines interleukin-1?, interleukin-6, and tumor necrosis factor-? in plasma and CSF in cerebral aneurysm patients. METHODS:We will conduct prospective randomized clinical trial among patients undergoing craniotomy and cerebral aneurysm clipping surgery in general anesthesia. Patients included in the trial will be randomly assigned to the lidocaine group (Group L) or to the control group (Group C). Patients in Group L, following general anesthesia induction, will receive topical anesthesia of the throat before endotracheal intubation and also regional anesthesia of the scalp before Mayfield frame placement, both done with lidocaine. Patients in Group C will have general anesthesia only without any lidocaine administration. The primary outcomes are concentrations of cytokines interleukin-1?, interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-? in plasma and CSF, measured at specific timepoints perioperatively. Secondary outcome is incidence of major neurological and infectious complications, as well as treatment outcome in both groups. DISCUSSION:Results of the trial could provide insight into influence of lidocaine on local and systemic inflammatory response in cerebrovascular surgery, and might improve future anesthesia practice and treatment outcome. TRIAL IS REGISTERED AT CLINICALTRIALS.GOV:: NCT03823482.
Project description:The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of intracameral mydriatic solution, as compared to preoperative topical mydriatics, in patients undergoing manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) under peribulbar anesthesia. To assess the sustainability of intracameral mydriasis in MSICS by monitoring pupil size at specific junctures during the surgery.This trial recruited 127 patients, who underwent MSICS under peribulbar block. Mydriasis in topical group was achieved with preoperative topical dilating drops while patients in intracameral group were taken up for surgery without dilation, and mydriasis was achieved intraoperatively with intracameral solution. Pupil sizes were measured serially, at six different junctures during surgery. Time duration of surgery, any intraoperative complications and first postoperative day visual acuity, corneal edema score, and anterior chamber inflammation score were noted in all patients.Mean pupil size just before peribulbar block was 7.3 mm in topical group and 3.3 mm in intracameral group (P < 0.001). Mean pupil size in intracameral group increased to 7.3 mm 30 s after injecting intracameral dilating solution. Mean pupil size in both groups progressively reduced, reaching 5.5 mm (topical group) and 6.2 mm (intracameral group) just before intraocular lens implantation (P = 0.001), and measured 5.1 mm and 5.5 mm, respectively, at the end of surgery (P = 0.048). On first postoperative day, there was no significant difference in distribution of corneal edema scores, AC inflammation scores, and in median logMAR visual acuity between the two groups.MSICS can be performed effectively and safely utilizing intracameral mydriatic solution, without the use of preoperative dilating drops.CTRI/2016/06/007036.
Project description:Background:Tranexamic acid (TXA) is widely used in orthopedic surgery to reduce perioperative bleeding. Since TXA inhibits fibrinolysis, there is concern that it may increase the risk of thromboembolic events. Objectives:To verify the prevalence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in patients receiving TXA during total knee arthroplasty and to compare topical with intravenous administration of the drug. Methods:All patients admitted for total knee arthroplasty due to primary arthrosis between June and November of 2014 were recruited consecutively. Thirty patients were randomized to a "topical group" (1.5 g TXA diluted in 50ml saline sprayed over the area operated, before tourniquet release), 30 to an "intravenous group" (20mg/kg TXA in 100 ml of saline, given at the same time as anesthesia), and 30 to a control group (100 ml of saline, given at the same time as anesthesia). All patients had duplex ultrasound scans of the legs on the 15th postoperative day. Results:Deep venous thrombosis events occurred in five of the 90 patients operated (one out of 30 in the topical group [3.3%], four out of 30 in the control group [13.3%], and zero in the intravenous group). All were confirmed by duplex ultrasound scans and all were asymptomatic. Prevalence rates of DVT were similar between groups (p = 0.112 for control vs. intravenous; p = 0.353 for control vs. topical; and p =1.000 for intravenous vs. topical, according to two-sided exact tests). Conclusions:Both topical and intravenous administration of TXA are safe with regard to occurrence of DVT, since the number of DVT cases in patients given TXA was not different to the number in those given placebo.
Project description:In this study, we intend to analyze ropivacaine and bupivacaine in various parameters during phacoemulsification under deep topical fornix nerve block (DTFNB), a known form of nerve block for phacoemulsification.This prospective randomized study was conducted on 100 patients undergoing elective cataract surgery by phacoemulsification under DTFNB. Patients were divided into two equal groups of fifty patients each, Groups B (bupivacaine) and Group R (ropivacaine). Two sponges, approximately 2 mm × 3 mm dimensions, saturated with either 0.5% bupivacaine or 0.75% ropivacaine were placed deep in the conjunctival fornices to perform the deep topical block. Both groups were evaluated for magnitude of pain and discomfort at various stages of phacoemulsification using a simple pain scoring system. The level of surgeon satisfaction, requirement for supplementary anesthesia, and surgical complications were also evaluated. Quantitative variables between the two groups were compared using unpaired t-test. Qualitative variables were correlated using Chi-square test.Overall demographic parameters of patients were similar in both groups. Similar mean pain scores were found in the ropivacaine and bupivacaine groups, with no statistical significance. Surgical satisfaction and the need for supplemental anesthesia were also statistically insignificant.Ropivacaine is a good alternative for deep topical anesthesia as it has a better safety margin and lesser toxic effect than other comparable local anesthetic agents.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women and several perioperative factors may account for tumor recurrence and metastasis. The anesthetic agents employed during cancer surgery might play a crucial role in cancer cell survival and patient outcomes. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to investigate the relationship between the type of anesthesia and overall survival in patients who underwent breast cancer surgery performed by one experienced surgeon. METHODS:All patients who underwent breast cancer surgery by an experienced surgeon between January 2006 and December 2010 were included in this study. Patients were separated into two groups according to the use of desflurane or propofol anesthesia during surgery. Locoregional recurrence and overall survival rates were assessed for the two groups (desflurane or propofol anesthesia). Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models and propensity score matching analyses were used to compare the hazard ratios for death and adjust for potential confounders (age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, TNM stage, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, Charlson Comorbidity Index, anesthesiologists, and functional status). RESULTS:Of the 976 breast cancer patients, 632 patients underwent breast cancer surgery with desflurane anesthesia, while 344 received propofol anesthesia. After propensity scoring, 592 patients remained in the desflurane group and 296 patients in the propofol group. The mortality rate was similar in the desflurane (38 deaths, 4%) and propofol (22 deaths, 4%; p = 0.812) groups in 5-year follow-up. The crude hazard ratio (HR) for all patients was 1.13 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.92, p = 0.646). No significant difference in the locoregional recurrence or overall 5-year survival rates were found after breast surgery using desflurane or propofol anesthesia (p = 0.454). Propensity score-matched analyses demonstrated similar outcomes in both groups. Patients who received propofol anesthesia had a higher mortality rate than those who received desflurane anesthesia in the matched groups (7% vs 6%, respectively) without significant difference (p = 0.561). In the propensity score-matched analyses, univariable analysis showed an insignificant finding (HR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.72-2.11, p = 0.449). After adjustment for the time since the earliest included patient, the HR remained insignificant (HR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.70-2.16, p = 0.475). CONCLUSION:In our non-randomized retrospective analysis, neither propofol nor desflurane anesthesia for breast cancer surgery by an experienced surgeon can affect patient prognosis and survival. The influence of propofol anesthesia on breast cancer outcome requires further investigation.
Project description:PURPOSE: To compare the development of posterior capsule opacification (PCO) for idiopathic epi-retinal membrane cases between 20- and 23-gauge phacovitrectomy. METHODS: Cataract surgery of phacoemulsification with the SA60AT implantation and 20- or 23-gauge vitrectomy was performed for 20 patients in both groups. Cataract surgery alone was performed for 50 patients as the control. The PCO density values were measured using Scheimpflug video photography at 1 week, 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after surgery. The number of eyes that required Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy was also examined. RESULTS: The mean PCO value in the 20-gauge phacovitrectomy group increased significantly with time (P<0.001), whereas those in the 23-gauge phacovitrectomy group and the cataract surgery group did not show any significant change. Furthermore, the PCO value in the 20-gauge phacovitrectomy group was significantly greater than that in the 23-gauge phacovitrectomy group at 6, 12, 18 (P<0.05), and 24 months (P<0.01) after surgery. The PCO value in the 23-gauge phacovitrectomy group was significantly greater than that in the cataract surgery group 24 months after surgery (P<0.05). The rate of capsulotomy in the 20-gauge phacovitrectomy group was significantly higher than that in the cataract surgery group (P=0.007), whereas there was no significant difference between the 23-gauge phacovitrectomy group and the cataract surgery group. CONCLUSION: PCO rate in eyes with the 23-gauge phacovitrectomy was lower than in those with the 20-gauge phacovitrectomy, and PCO rate even in the 23-gauge phacovitrectomy was higher than in those with cataract surgery.
Project description:To compare the effect of melatonin and gabapentin on anxiety, pain, sedation scores, and satisfaction of surgeon in patients of cataract surgery.One hundred thirty patients aged between 35 and 85 years scheduled for cataract surgery were randomly allocated to three study groups to receive melatonin (6 mg), gabapentin (600 mg) or placebo 90 min before arrival in the operating room. Pain, anxiety, and sedation scores during block and surgery as well as the surgeon's satisfaction with the surgery were assessed.Anxiety scores decreased significantly in melatonin and gabapentin groups compared to the placebo group after premedication and extended to early postoperative period. The level of anxiety showed no statistically significant difference between melatonin and gabapentin groups at any time of measurement. There were significant differences between the pain scores during retrobulbar placement in gabapentin versus placebo (95% CI 3 to 4; P = 0.001) and melatonin (95% CI 3 to 4; P = 0.040) groups. Also, there were significant differences between the sedation scores during retrobulbar placement in gabapentin and placebo groups (95% CI 2 to 2.5; P = 0.046). The difference in sedation scores during retrobulbar placement in melatonin versus gabapentin and placebo groups was not significant. Neither the intraoperative pain scores nor the postoperative pain scores were different between the three groups. The surgeon reported similar quality of operation conditions during surgery for the three study groups.The level of anxiety was significantly lower with both anxiolytic drugs compared to placebo. Furthermore, gabapentin decreased the pain and improved the sedation scores only during retrobulbar placement compared to the placebo.
Project description:Propofol sedation has been applied during esophagogastroduodenoscopy procedures, but whether topical pharyngeal anesthesia should be administered at the same time has rarely been reported. Our study examined the role of topical pharyngeal anesthesia in sedated endoscopies in a randomized controlled double-blinded clinical trial. A total of 626 patients who underwent sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy were randomized into the experimental group (n?=?313) or the control group (n?=?313). The discomfort score, immediately and one day after the procedure, was not statistically significant [7.2 (5-9) vs. 7.5 (6-9), P?=?0.210; 2.3 (0-3) vs. 2.6 (0-4), P?=?0.095, respectively]. Two patients in the experimental group and three patients in the control group needed oral medication for pharyngeal discomfort (P?=?0.354). The satisfaction score was 9.2 (8-10) in the experimental group and 8.9 (7-10) in the control group (P?=?0.778). Lidocaine topical pharyngeal anesthesia in propofol-sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy did not further reduce the pharyngeal discomfort or improve the satisfaction. This clinical trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03070379).