Comparison of subtenon anaesthesia with peribulbar anaesthesia for manual small incision cataract surgery.
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2005-12-08
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the safety and efficacy of subtenon anaesthesia with peribulbar anaesthesia in manual small incision cataract surgery using a randomised control clinical trial.
METHOD: One hundred and sixty-eight patients were randomised to subtenon and peribulbar groups with preset criteria after informed consent. All surgeries were performed by four surgeons. Pain during administration of anaesthesia, during surgery and 4 h after surgery was graded on a visual analogue pain scale and compared for both the techniques. Sub-conjuntival haemorrhage, chemosis, akinesia after administration of anaesthesia and positive pressure during surgery were also compared. Patients were followed up for 6 weeks postoperatively.
RESULTS: About 146/168 (86.9%) patients completed the six-week follow-up. Thirty-one out of 88 (35.2%) patients of peribulbar group and 62/80(77.5%) of subtenon group experienced no pain during administration of anaesthesia. There was no significant difference in pain during and 4 h after surgery. Subtenon group had slightly more sub-conjunctival haemorrhage. About 57 (64.8%) patients of the peribulbar group had absolute akinesia during surgery as compared to none (0%) in sub-tenon group. There was no difference in intraoperative and postoperative complications and final visual acuity.
CONCLUSION: Sub-tenon anaesthesia is safe and as effective as peribulbar anaesthesia and is more comfortable to the patient at the time of administration.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Parkar T, Gogate P, Deshpande M, Adenwala A, Maske A, Verappa K. Comparison of subtenon anaesthesia with peribulbar anaesthesia for manual small incision cataract surgery. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2005 Dec; 53(4): 255-9