Topical anaesthetic effects on skin vasculature with potential implications for laser treatment

Therapeutic Options for Migraines in the Microsurgical Patient: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

There exists an increasing array of treatments proposed to prevent, alleviate, and abort symptoms of a migraine; however, for patients who undergo reconstructive microsurgery, caution must be taken to preserve vascular integrity. This study is the first-to-date scoping review of vascular and bleeding risk of current migraine therapies, with the purpose of identifying potential therapeutic agents for postoperative migraine management appropriate for microsurgical patients.

METHODS

Currently available migraine therapeutics were compiled from the UpToDate software system and the American Academy of Family Physicians. A PubMed literature review was performed for each therapeutic's effect on bleeding or vascular involvement. Data were compiled into tables of abortive, symptom-controlling and prophylactic, and nonpharmacologic treatments. Expert microsurgeons reviewed the data to provide recommendations for optimized patient care.

RESULTS

Triptans and other ergot derivatives demonstrated strong evidence of vasoconstriction and were greatly advised against for immediate postmicrosurgical use. Novel pharmaceutical therapies such as lasmiditan and calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists have no literature indicating potential for vasoconstriction or hematoma and remain an investigational option for abortive medical treatment. For symptom control, acetaminophen appears the safest option, with clinical judgment and further research needed for use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. Alternative treatment techniques may include migraine prophylaxis with botulinum toxin injection or nutraceutical treatment by means of magnesium supplementation or coenzyme Q10 administration, minimizing the need for additional medication in the postoperative setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing reconstructive microsurgery have a unique medical profile limiting the therapeutic options available to treat migraines. This review provides preliminary evidence to be considered as a guide for prescribing therapeutics for migraine in the postoperative setting.

The Comparison of Efficacy and Safety Between General and Topical Anesthesia on Micro-Plasma Radiofrequency Treatment for Hypertrophic Scar: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

While micro-plasma radiofrequency (MPR) treatment has a significant impact on hypertrophic scars, patients often require anesthesia to alleviate substantial discomfort. Currently, patients with similar degrees of scarring may choose surface anesthesia or general anesthesia based on their personal preferences. Nevertheless, the effectiveness and safety of different anesthesia modalities remain uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of both general and surface anesthesia in MPR treatment for hypertrophic scars.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving 101 patients diagnosed with hypertrophic scars who underwent MPR with different anesthesia methods. The primary measures of efficacy included the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores assessed before the first treatment and six months after the final treatment. Pain relief was evaluated using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores. Safety was assessed by comparing the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups.

RESULTS

Patients in the general anesthesia group showed a significant difference in scar pigmentation 6 months after the treatment and lower pain level than those in the surface anesthesia group in the treatment of MPR. The difference in safety was not statistically significant. After adjusting for confounding factors and propensity score matching, the outcome of VSS and VAS scores was stable.

CONCLUSION

General anesthesia, as opposed to surface anesthesia, appears to enhance both the effectiveness and safety of MPR while reducing postoperative pain in the treatment of hypertrophic scars. For patients with heightened pain sensitivity, general anesthesia may be the preferred treatment option.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors http://www.springer.com/00266 .

Does Topical Anesthesia Alter the Outcomes of Vascular Laser Procedures? Review of Vasodynamic Effects and Clinical Outcomes Data

BACKGROUND

Topical anesthesia has vasodynamic effects within the skin and therefore has the potential to change the presence of hemoglobin as a chromophore before intense pulsed light (IPL) and vascular laser treatments. It is unclear whether this is clinically relevant. Global consensus on the use of topical anesthetics in this context is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

Review the effects of topical anesthetics on the skin microvasculature and the clinical implications of such effects on vascular treatments.

METHODS

PubMed and Medline searches were performed to identify studies examining the vasodynamic effects of topical anesthesia on skin and evaluating differences in efficacy of IPL and vascular laser treatments with or without topical anesthetic use.

RESULTS

Published studies reveal variable effects of different topical anesthetic agents on skin microvasculature. Only 3 controlled studies that directly examined the effect of topical anesthesia on clinical outcomes for pulsed dye laser (PDL) treatment of vascular conditions were identified. They did not support a difference in clinical outcomes with or without the use of topical anesthesia before PDL treatment.

CONCLUSION

Although topical anesthetic agents have vasodynamic effects within the skin, there is currently insufficient evidence to advise against their use before light and laser-based vascular treatments.

Topical anesthetics for pediatric laser treatment

Topical anesthetic agent causes transient insensibility to pain in a limited area of skin, and provides effective anesthesia in a short onset time, short duration, with seldom local or systemic side effects on intact skin and is simple to use. Topical formulations may offer significant benefits for prevention of procedural pain. Currently, they are considered to be the most effective anesthesia for laser treatments. Unfortunately, there is no standard anesthetic technique for this procedure. Lasers are being widely used in numerous dermatological and esthetics treatments in childhood. The advancement of new knowledge in laser technology have contributed to the development of new lasers that are commonly used in a pediatric population, such as Pulsed Dye, Carbon-dioxide and Nd:YAG laser. The most commonly used topical anesthetics in young patients for minimally or moderately painful laser cutaneous procedures are Lidocaine, Prilocaine, Tetracaine gel and combinations thereof.

The Efficacy of Pulsed Dye Laser Pretreated With or Without Local Anesthetic on Patients Presenting With Erythema of Face, Neck, Chest, and Extremities

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Erythema is one of the most common cosmetic concerns and usually responds well to pulsed dye laser (PDL) treatment. As this laser can cause significant discomfort, topical anesthesia is sometimes offered. However, it is still uncertain whether topical anesthetics can affect the outcome of the laser therapy. We performed a retrospective single site study to compare the efficacy of PDL for the treatment of erythema in patients with and without pretreatment with topical anesthetic.

STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS

A chart review was performed and patients who presented with erythema of face, neck, chest, and extremities pretreated with topical anesthesia (23% lidocaine/7% tetracaine ointment or 7% lidocaine/7% tetracaine ointment) undergoing PDL were reviewed and compared with another group without anesthesia. Two blinded dermatologists evaluated the postlaser procedure photographs and gave an assessment compared with baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 69 patient charts were reviewed. The erythema resulted from various skin conditions including telangiectasia, cherry angioma, striae, and rosacea. The mean improvement was 2.2581 in the anesthesia group and 2.2632 in the nonanesthesia group. There was no significant difference between both groups as confirmed by a noninferiority test.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical anesthesia with lidocaine and tetracaine ointment do not interfere with the efficacy of the PDL. Since pain management is essential for any cosmetic procedure, the application of a local anesthetic will enhance patient comfort and satisfaction during treatment with PDL. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.