Course handouts are now available
Click here
Come to London
WATCH to find out why
Site updates:
Programme Updates. Programme Overview and - Video Symposium on Challenging Cases now available.
Posters
(results will display both Free Papers & Poster)
Percaruncular single-injection anesthesia versus classic double-injection peribulbar anesthesia in cataract surgery: a prospective randomized study
Poster Details
First Author: W.Zbiba TUNISIA
Co Author(s): I. Ammous M. Korbi E. Bouayed A. Baba J. Abid O. Beltaief
Abstract Details
Purpose:
This prospective randomized single-center study was conducted to compare the percaruncular (also called medial canthus) single-injection anesthesia in cataract surgery, to the classic double-injection peribulbar technique.
Setting:
Department of Ophthalmology, Mohamed Taher Maamouri Hospital
Nabeul Tunisia
Methods:
Ninety patients scheduled for cataract surgery were randomly assigned to either a single medial canthus injection or a double peribulbar injection. We injected both group an anesthetic mixture: Lidocaine 2 % with Adrenaline /Bupivacaine 0.5% /clonidine. Ocular and eyelid akinesia, amount of anesthetic agent injected, number of reinjections, the adequacy of anesthesia and complications were assessed after the procedure.
Results:
The percaruncular single-injection peribulbar anesthesia was significantly less painful (adequate anesthesia in 93.3% of cases) and required significantly less anesthetic agent than the double-injection peribulbar anesthesia(8.2±1.4ml versus 10.2±1.2ml). Akinesia-score, pain perception and the reinjection rate were similar in the 2 groups. There were no major anesthesia-related adverse events, only minor complications: chemosis (6.6 % for de percaruncular anesthesia versus 8.8% for the classic one) and spotting subcojonctival hemorrhage (6.6 % for de percaruncular anesthesia versus 4.4% for the classic one).
Conclusions:
Percaruncular single-injection anesthesia is as much effective as the usual double-injection peribulbar anesthesia in cataract surgery. Although a reasonable percent of patients require a supplementary injection, yet this technique is easier to master, have broader indications, safer, less painful, uses less anesthetic agent than the classic peribulbar double-injection. The incidence of minor complications is in the accepted range. FINANCIAL INTEREST: NONE