Mahfouz Abdul Kader M, Al Katheri Hassan M
Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Egypt.
Clin Ophthalmol. 2007 Mar;1(1):55-60.
Evaluate efficacy of superficial peribulbar anesthesia for cataract extraction compared with conventional peribulbar anesthesia.
Department of Ophthalmology, Al Nahdha Hospital (Tertiary Ophthalmic and ENT Hospital) and Magraby Eye & Ear Center, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman.
Patients scheduled for cataract extraction with intraocular lens implantation were randomly divided into two groups according to anesthetic technique used. The first group patients were anesthetized using superficial peribulbar anesthesia, while second group patients were anesthetized using conventional peribulbar block. The efficacy of the blockade was judged by onset and degree of akinesia and volume of local anesthetic needed to obtain acceptable akinesia, sensation of pain during surgery, effect on intraocular pressure, degree of patient satisfaction, and incidence of complications.
Nine hundred patients scheduled for cataract extraction with intraocular lens implantation during the period of June 2003 and October 2006 were included in this study. Five hundred cases were anesthetized using superficial peribulbar anesthesia and four hundred cases were anesthetized using conventional peribulbar block. The two groups were comparable as regards age, weight, gender, duration of surgery, and degree of analgesia. Superficial peribulbar anesthesia provided faster onset, higher degree of akinesia with less volume of local anesthetics used, no need for supplementary reinjection, no effect on intraocular pressure, and better patient satisfaction score compared with conventional peribulbar anesthesia. There were no serious complications in both groups. The incidence of subconjunctival hemorrhage was significantly higher in superficial peribulbar group (18%) compared with conventional peribulbar block (0.5%).
Superficial peribulbar anesthesia is a safe, simple, quick to perform, and effective method of anesthesia for cataract surgery with better patient satisfaction, better akinesia, and comparable analgesia compared with conventional peribulbar block. Subconjunctival hemorrhage is a self-limited complication associated with this technique.
评估与传统球周麻醉相比,浅表球周麻醉用于白内障摘除术的疗效。
阿曼苏丹国马斯喀特的纳赫达医院眼科(三级眼科和耳鼻喉医院)及马格拉比眼耳中心。
计划行白内障摘除联合人工晶状体植入术的患者,根据所采用的麻醉技术随机分为两组。第一组患者采用浅表球周麻醉,第二组患者采用传统球周阻滞麻醉。通过运动不能的起效时间和程度、获得可接受运动不能所需的局部麻醉药用量、手术期间的疼痛感觉、对眼压的影响、患者满意度程度以及并发症发生率来判断阻滞效果。
本研究纳入了2003年6月至2006年10月期间计划行白内障摘除联合人工晶状体植入术的900例患者。500例采用浅表球周麻醉,400例采用传统球周阻滞麻醉。两组在年龄、体重、性别、手术时间和镇痛程度方面具有可比性。与传统球周麻醉相比,浅表球周麻醉起效更快,运动不能程度更高,所用局部麻醉药用量更少,无需补充再次注射,对眼压无影响,患者满意度评分更高。两组均未出现严重并发症。浅表球周麻醉组结膜下出血的发生率(18%)显著高于传统球周阻滞麻醉组(0.5%)。
浅表球周麻醉是一种安全、简单、操作迅速且有效的白内障手术麻醉方法,与传统球周阻滞相比,患者满意度更高,运动不能效果更好,镇痛效果相当。结膜下出血是与该技术相关的一种自限性并发症。