Pain in scleral pocket incision cataract surgery using topical and peribulbar anesthesia

Citation
P. Virtanen et T. Huha, Pain in scleral pocket incision cataract surgery using topical and peribulbar anesthesia, J CAT REF S, 24(12), 1998, pp. 1609-1613
Citations number
19
Categorie Soggetti
Optalmology
Journal title
JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY
ISSN journal
08863350 → ACNP
Volume
24
Issue
12
Year of publication
1998
Pages
1609 - 1613
Database
ISI
SICI code
0886-3350(199812)24:12<1609:PISPIC>2.0.ZU;2-H
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the pain produced during different phases of phacoemul sification cataract surgery using a scleral pocket incision under topical v ersus peribulbar anesthesia. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finla nd. Methods: This prospective study comprised 100 cataract patients who were ra ndomly selected to have phacoemulsification with a scleral pocket incision using either topical or peribulbar anesthesia. Topical anesthesia comprised oxybuprocaine 0.4% drops. Peribulbar anesthesia was given with an inferola teral transconjuctival injection of an even mixture of lidocaine 2% and bup ivacaine 0.5% with hyaluronidase. Inadvertent eye movement during surgery w as recorded. Pain occurring during intravenous line cannulation, introducti on of the anesthestic agent, and phacoemulsification was measured using a v isual analog scale (from 0 to 10) and a descriptive verbal 5-step scale. Pa tients were asked about pain immediately after each phase. Results: The pain during cannulation was similar in both groups (P =.498). The peribulbar injection was statistically significantly more painful than induction of topical anesthesia (2.11 and 0.10, respectively; P <.001). Sur gery was statistically significantly more painful in the topical group than in the peribulbar group (2.76 and 0.85, respectively; P <.001). The mean p ain score during all 3 phases was similar (1.43 topical group and 1.51 peri bulbar group; P =.500). On the verbal scale, surgery was more painful under topical than under peribulbar anesthesia (P<.001). There were no statistic al differences in pain during the peribulbar injection and during cannulati on (P =.461 and P =.462, respectively). Inadvertent eye movement occurred m ore often in the topical anesthesia group. Conclusion: Considering the entire procedure, total pain using topical anes thesia was acceptable and equal to that using peribulbar anesthesia for pha coemulsification with a scleral pocket incision. Pain during phacoemulsific ation was greater under topical anesthesia but not significantly different from the pain during the peribulbar injection.