...
首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Anesthesiology >Single Injection versus Double Injection Peribulbar Anaesthesia in Eye Camp Surgery: a Comparative evaluation of Akinesia and Anaesthesia
【24h】

Single Injection versus Double Injection Peribulbar Anaesthesia in Eye Camp Surgery: a Comparative evaluation of Akinesia and Anaesthesia

机译:眼营手术中单次注射与二次注射眼球周围麻醉:运动性和麻醉性的比较评估

获取原文

摘要

Background: Recent literature suggests that single injection peribulbar block is as effective as two injection block. Moreover, there are concerns for globe injury due to second injection during two injection technique. We compared the efficacy of two injection peribulbar block with single injection peribulbar block for globe and lid akinesia, globe anesthesia and complications in eye camp surgery.Methods and patients: A prospective single blinded study of 204 patients was done during eye camps organized by Red Cross Society of Jamshedpur. All the blocks were given by consultant anaesthetist and operating surgeons were unaware about the technique of peribulbar block. Data was collected for akinesia (globe & lid), anaesthesia and supplemental injections. Surgeon's satisfaction and pain during injection were also recorded. Results: Ninety patients (88.29%) in group-1 and, 96(94.11%) patients in group-2 had adequate globe akinesia after respective peribulbar injection. Fourteen (13.72%) patients in group-1 and, 11 (10.8%) patients in group-2 required supplemental injections. Scores for globe akinesia and lid akinesia globe anaesthesia and supplemental blocks, pain on injection and surgeon's satisfaction were all comparable without any significant statistical difference. Conclusion: In our study we found that single injection peribulbar block is as effective as standard two injection peribulbar block during eye camp surgery, and can be used instead of two injection technique to avoid possible globe injury which may occur due to second injection. Introduction The eye camp surgery as compared to hospital based facilities is different and difficult due to lack of infrastructure and multidisciplinary support to handle the complications. Camp surgery thus requires an easy to perform anaesthetic technique with faster onset and higher safety profile. Peribulbar anaesthesia is therefore near ideal anaesthetic technique for cataract surgery in eye camp situation due to fewer propensities for serious complication1,2. Low volume two injection technique gives acceptable conditions for cataract operation in eye camps3. However, it is suggested that single injection is safer than two injections due to higher incidence of globe perforations 4,5. We conducted a randomized single blind prospective study in eye surgery camps (organized by Red Cross Society, Jamshedpur) to evaluate and compare single injection peribulbar technique6 (as suggested by Leonardo Rizzo) with our low volume two injection peribulbar technique3 for globe/ lid akinesia, globe anaesthesia, chemosis, block related complications, patient's discomfort and overall surgeons satisfaction with operating conditions and effectiveness of block. Patients and Methods After approval from local managing committee of Red Cross Society, Informed consent was obtained from the patients. Two hundred four consecutive adult patients scheduled for peribulbar block for cataract surgery with IOL during eye camps were included. Preoperative screening was done and patients who were having active infection or evidence of infection were not included. All the peribulbar blocks were performed by consultant anesthetist experienced in ophthalmic anaesthesia. Surgery was performed by either of two surgeons who were unaware about the anaesthesia technique. The patients were allocated into two groups according to the technique of block. Single injection group-1 (n=102) and two injection gropup-2 (n=102) patients. For local anaesthesia a fixed 6ml. mixture containing 2 percent xylocaine with 1:200,000 adrenaline combined with 120 IU hyaluronidase was used for both techniques. The ocular block was performed as follows. In peribulbar anaesthesia by two injection technique, First injection containing 4ml local anaesthetic was given at junction of the lateral third and medial two thirds of the lower orbital margin and the second injection containing 2 ml was given just lateral to supratrochlear notch, both injection
机译:背景:最近的文献表明,单次注射眼球周围阻滞与两次注射时一样有效。此外,由于两次注射技术期间的第二次注射而引起的球囊损伤也令人担忧。我们比较了两次注射球囊周围阻滞与单次注射球囊周围阻滞对眼球运动和眼球运动障碍,球囊麻醉和并发症的疗效。方法和患者:由红十字会组织的一项对204名患者的前瞻性单盲研究哲雪铺学会。所有的阻滞都是由顾问麻醉师给定的,并且手术外科医生并不了解球旁阻滞的技术。收集运动障碍(眼球和眼睑),麻醉和补充注射的数据。还记录了外科医生在注射过程中的满意度和痛苦。结果:第1组有90例患者(88.29%)和第2组有96例(94.11%)患者在各自的球后注射后均具有足够的球形运动障碍。第1组中有14名(13.72%)患者,第2组中有11名(10.8%)患者需要补充注射。球性运动不全和眼睑运动不全的得分以​​及全麻,补充性阻滞,注射时的疼痛和外科医生的满意度均相当,无统计学差异。结论:在我们的研究中,我们发现在眼部手术期间,单次注射球囊阻塞与标准的两次注射球囊阻塞一样有效,并且可以代替两次注射技术使用,以避免因第二次注射而可能引起的眼球损伤。引言由于缺乏基础设施和多学科支持来处理并发症,与基于医院的设施相比,眼营手术是不同且困难的。因此,露营手术需要一种易于实施的麻醉技术,且起效快,安全性高。因此,由于严重并发症的发生率较低1,2,眼球周围麻醉使白内障手术接近理想的白内障手术麻醉技术1,2。小体积两次注射技术为眼部手术中的白内障手术提供了可接受的条件。但是,由于球形穿孔4,5的发生率较高,因此建议单次注射比两次注射更安全。我们在眼科手术营地(由红十字会,贾姆谢德布尔组织)中进行了一项随机单盲前瞻性研究,以评估和比较单次注射眼球旁注技术6(由莱昂纳多·里佐建议)和我们的小剂量两次注射眼球旁注技术3,以解决眼球/眼睑运动障碍,全身麻醉,化学疗法,阻滞相关的并发症,患者的不适以及外科医生对阻滞情况和阻滞效果的总体满意度。患者和方法经红十字会地方管理委员会批准后,患者征得知情同意。包括计划在眼部训练营中接受IOL的白内障手术的球囊周围阻滞的连续204名成年患者。进行了术前筛查,不包括有活动性感染或感染迹象的患者。所有的眼球周围阻滞均由在眼科麻醉方面经验丰富的顾问麻醉师进行。由不了解麻醉技术的两名外科医生中的任何一名进行手术。根据阻断技术将患者分为两组。单次注射组1(n = 102)和两个注射组gropup-2(n = 102)患者。对于局部麻醉,固定6ml。两种技术均使用含有2%的木卡因和1:200,000肾上腺素的混合物以及120 IU的透明质酸酶。眼部阻滞如下进行。在通过两次注射技术进行的球周麻醉中,在外侧下缘的三分之一处和内侧三分之二的交界处,第一次注射含4ml局麻药,第二次注射含2 ml的麻醉剂刚好位于肩hl上切口外侧

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号