Chaudhary Rizwan Ahmad, Khaqan Hussain Ahmad, Ahmad Ayesha, Imtiaz Usman, Raza Hassan, Shabbir Usman
Department of Ophthalmology, Lahore General Hospital, Ameer-Ud-Din Medical College/Postgraduate Medical Institute, Lahore.
Department of Radiotherapy, INMOL Hospital, Lahore.
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2018 Jun;28(6):452-455. doi: 10.29271/jcpsp.2018.06.452.
To compare the safety and efficacy of topical anesthesia versus peribulbar anesthesia for 23-gauge pars plana vitrectomy.
Randomized controlled trial.
Ophthalmology Department, Lahore General Hospital, Ameer-ud-Din Medical College, Postgraduate Medical Institute, Lahore from April 2013 to March 2016.
A total of 110 patients were equally divided (n=55) in group A (topical anesthesia) and group B (peribulbar anesthesia). In group A, pledget soaked with 0.5% proparacaine hydrochloride were placed in the superior and inferior fornices three minutes before surgery, and removed just before surgery. For group B patients, 3 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine was used for peribulbar anesthesia three minutes before surgery. Surgical time was noted from the placement of pledget in fornix till the eye pad placed in group A, and from the time of peribulbar anesthesia in group B till the eye pad placed at the end of surgery. All data was recorded in Excel sheet and p-values were calculated using online OpenEpi.
The mean age of the patient was 56.28 ±13.76 years. Male patients were 78 (70.9%) and female patients were 32 (29.1%). Mean duration of surgery was 30.32 ±7.07 minutes and mean pain score was 2.30 ±0.98. There was a significant difference with respect to mean duration of surgery in patients who were given topical anesthesia (32.52 ±6.92 minutes) versus those given peribulbar anesthesia (28.12 ±6.57 minutes, p<0.001). Mean pain score in topical anesthesia group (3.11 ±0.89) was significantly higher as compared to peribulbar anesthesia group (2.67 ±0.91, p=0.011).
Topical anesthesia is as effective as peribulbar anesthesia in terms of patient comfort and duration of surgery for 23-G pars plana vitrectomy in patients with vitreous hemorrhage.
比较表面麻醉与球周麻醉用于23G玻璃体切割术的安全性和有效性。
随机对照试验。
2013年4月至2016年3月,拉合尔阿米尔丁医学院拉合尔综合医院眼科。
总共110例患者被平均分为A组(表面麻醉)和B组(球周麻醉),每组55例。A组患者在手术前3分钟将浸有0.5%盐酸丙美卡因的棉片置于上下穹窿部,手术即将开始前取出。B组患者在手术前3分钟使用3ml 0.5%布比卡因进行球周麻醉。记录A组从棉片置于穹窿部到放置眼垫的手术时间,以及B组从球周麻醉到手术结束放置眼垫的时间。所有数据记录在Excel表格中,使用在线OpenEpi计算p值。
患者的平均年龄为56.28±13.76岁。男性患者78例(70.9%),女性患者32例(29.1%)。平均手术时间为30.32±7.07分钟,平均疼痛评分为2.30±0.98。接受表面麻醉的患者平均手术时间(32.52±6.92分钟)与接受球周麻醉的患者(28.12±6.57分钟,p<0.001)相比有显著差异。表面麻醉组的平均疼痛评分(3.11±0.89)明显高于球周麻醉组(2.67±0.91,p=0.011)。
对于玻璃体出血患者的23G玻璃体切割术,在患者舒适度和手术持续时间方面,表面麻醉与球周麻醉效果相当。