Comparison of subtenon anaesthesia with peribulbar anaesthesia for manual small incision cataract surgery.

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorParkar, Tasneemen_US
dc.contributor.authorGogate, Parikshiten_US
dc.contributor.authorDeshpande, Madanen_US
dc.contributor.authorAdenwala, Arifen_US
dc.contributor.authorMaske, Amaren_US
dc.contributor.authorVerappa, Ken_US
dc.date.accessioned2005-12-08en_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-05-29T08:14:23Z
dc.date.available2005-12-08en_US
dc.date.available2009-05-29T08:14:23Z
dc.date.issued2005-12-08en_US
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: 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.en_US
dc.description.affiliationHV Desai Eye Hospital, Pune, India.en_US
dc.identifier.citationParkar 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): 255-9en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://imsear.searo.who.int/handle/123456789/70249
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.ijo.inen_US
dc.subject.meshAnesthesia, Local --adverse effectsen_US
dc.subject.meshAnesthetics, Local --administration & dosageen_US
dc.subject.meshCataract Extraction --methodsen_US
dc.subject.meshConjunctival Diseases --etiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshHemorrhage --etiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshInjections --adverse effectsen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_US
dc.subject.meshPain --etiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshTreatment Outcomeen_US
dc.titleComparison of subtenon anaesthesia with peribulbar anaesthesia for manual small incision cataract surgery.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.typeRandomized Controlled Trialen_US
dc.typeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'ten_US
Files
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.79 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Description:
Download
Collections
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology