Anesthetic effectiveness of topical levobupivacaine 0.75% versus topical proparacaine 0.5% for intravitreal injections

Nurgül Ornek, Alparslan Apan, Kemal Ornek, Fatih Günay, Nurgül Ornek, Alparslan Apan, Kemal Ornek, Fatih Günay

Abstract

Background and purpose: Today no method of topical anesthesia for intravitreal injection administration has been proven to make the patient comfortable yet. We compared the efficacy of topical levobupivacaine 0.75% and proparacaine 0.5% in patients undergoing intravitreal injections.

Materials and methods: A prospective, randomized study comparing two agents for topical anesthesia in intravitreal injections. Ninety-six consecutive patients were enrolled into two groups to receive either topical levobupivacaine 0.75% (n=48) or proparacaine 0.5% (n=48). Patients were asked to score their pain using a visual analog scale (VAS) immediately following the injection. The average of these scores was used as the primary outcome. The surgeon performing the procedure scored his perception of the patients' pain using the Wong-Baker FACES scale.

Results: Mean VAS pain scores for two groups were found to be 44.77 ± 16.42 and 34.18 ± 14.83, respectively. Mean VAS pain score in the proparacaine group was significantly lower than that in the levobupivacaine group (P= 0.003). Mean Wong-Baker FACES scores for the two groups were 1.08 ± 0.49 and 1.10 ± 0.30, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between levobupivacaine and proparacaine groups (P=0.824).

Conclusions: Topical proparacaine 0.5% was more effective in preventing pain during intravitreal injections.

Keywords: Anesthetic effectiveness; intravitreal injections; topical levobupivacaine; topical proparacaine.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Visual analog scale for pain
Figure 2
Figure 2
Wong-Baker FACES pain rating scale

References

    1. Veritti D, Di Giulio A, Sarao V, Lanzetta P. Drug safety evaluation of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2012;11:331–40.
    1. Day S, Acquah K, Mruthyunjaya P, Grossman DS, Lee PP, Sloan FA. Ocular complications after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in Medicare patients with age-related macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;152:266–72.
    1. Kozak I, Cheng L, Freeman WR. Lidocaine gel anesthesia for intravitreal drug administration. Retina. 2005;25:994–8.
    1. Kaderli B, Avci R. Comparison of topical and subconjunctival anesthesia in intravitreal injection administrations. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2006;16:718–21.
    1. Friedman SM, Margo CE. Topical gel vs subconjunctival lidocaine for intravitreous injection: A randomized clinical trial. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:887–8.
    1. Yau GL, Jackman CS, Hooper PL, Sheidow TG. Intravitreal injection anesthesia-comparison of different topical agents: A prospective randomized controlled trial. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;151:333–7.
    1. Cintra LP, Lucena LR, Da Silva JA, Costa RA, Scott IU, Jorge R. Comparative study of analgesic effectiveness using three different anesthetic techniques for intravitreal injection of bevacizumab. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2009;40:13–8.
    1. Davis MJ, Pollack JS, Shott S. Comparison of topical anesthetics for intravitreal injections: A randomized clinical trial. Retina. 2012;32:701–5.
    1. Blaha GR, Tilton EP, Barouch FC, Marx JL. Randomized trial of anesthetic methods for intravitreal injections. Retina. 2010;10:1–5.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera