Single-prick infiltration anesthesia for external dacryocystorhinostomy

Results of Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy under Local Anesthesia with Minimal Sedation

PURPOSE

We evaluated the tolerability and efficacy of endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (Endo-DCR) in patients treated in the leaning position and under local anesthesia with minimal sedation (LAS).

STUDY DESIGN

Questionnaire to determine subjective success of Endo-DCR.

METHODS

From May 2013 to August 2014, a total of 95 eyes with epiphora presented to the Myoung Eye Plastic Surgery Clinic in Seoul, Korea, and were treated with Endo-DCR under LAS. Three nerve blocks were administered to achieve local anesthesia. Postoperatively, the wound site was packed with Nasopore to control bleeding and promote wound healing. Outcome measures included a patient questionnaire completed on postoperative day 7 to evaluate intraoperative and postoperative pain based on the VAS (0 to 10).

RESULTS

Mean intraoperative and postoperative pain scores were 1.03 and 1.64, respectively, for 95 eyes. Of the 95 eyes treated, the patients in 82 eyes (86.31%) reported that they would prefer LAS over GA for a repeat Endo-DCR. The subjective and objective surgical success rates were 90.14% and 95.77%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Endo-DCR carried out under LAS with the patient in the leaning position is more useful, efficient, and feasible than Endo-DCR performed under GA with the patient in the supine position.

Assisted local anesthesia for powered endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy

PURPOSE

The role of assisted local anaesthetic (aLA) for both endoscopic and external dacryocystorhinostomy is a well-tolerated and established approach. However the tolerability of aLA is unclear with powered burrs used in powered endoscopic DCR (PEDCR). We aim to evaluate the acceptability of aLA for PEDCR.

METHODS

This is a prospective, interventional, non-randomized, non-comparative, single surgeon study. Consecutive series of patients that underwent PEDCR performed under aLA were included in the study. Tolerability was assessed by intra-operative pain score on 100 point visual analogue scale (VAS) and if patients were willing to have aLA-PEDCR again.

RESULTS

A total of 44 PEDCR was performed on 42 patients.56% of patients reported 0 on 100 point VAS, 65.9% (29/44) reported <10, 88.6% (39/44) reported <20 and no patients had score of >30/100. 97.7% (43/44) of patients are happy to have PEDCR performed again under aLA. The one patient unwilling to have a repeat aLA-PEDCR was not because of pain but intolerance to the sound of drilling.

CONCLUSION

PEDCR with assisted local anaesthetic is well tolerated and accepted by patients.

Simplified local anesthesia technique for external dacryocystorhinostomy without nasal packing: a new technique and pilot study outcome

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this paper is to describe a simplified local anesthesia technique for external dacryocystorhinostomy (EXT-DCR).

METHODS

In this pilot, retrospective, noncomparative, interventional case series, 448 patients (480 eyes) underwent EXT-DCR using a simplified local anesthesia technique. Nasal mucosal anesthesia was achieved using combined application of 6 mL of oxymetazoline 0.025% nasal spray and lidocaine 1% in the same spray bottle, without any packing of the nose with either pledgets or ribbon gauze. Local infiltration anesthesia consisted of subcutaneous injection of a 7 mL mixture of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine injected on the flat side of the nose beneath the incision site, in addition to a second medial peribulbar injection (3 mL, 2% lidocaine without epinephrine).

RESULTS

Successful unilateral or bilateral EXT-DCR was achieved in 432/448 patients (96.4%). Four patients could not tolerate the procedure under local anesthesia and were converted to general anesthesia. Four patients required additional local anesthetic injections because of intolerable pain. Heavy sedation was essential in eight uncooperative patients because surgical manipulation was impossible. The remaining patients tolerated the procedure well. The intraoperative bleeding rate was very low except in one patient. Mean operative time was 16 minutes. Severe postoperative epistaxis was observed in four patients. Temporary anosmia developed in one patient.

CONCLUSION

Our simplified local anesthesia approach of EXT-DCR is convenient for the patient because it avoids unnecessary nasal packing. It is also safe and effective, as evidenced by the high rate of successful completion of the procedure without conversion to general anesthesia or the need for supplemental local anesthesia.

Comparison of postoperative pain and satisfaction after dacryocystorhinostomy in patients operated on under local and general anesthesia

BACKGROUND

There has been only 1 study on postoperative pain after external dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) that compared pain between 2 groups of patients; 1 group received local anesthesia and the other received general anesthesia. To further characterize the relationship between these 2 types of anesthesia and postoperative pain, we designed a study in which a single patient received these 2 different anesthesia modalities for a short interval on 2 different sides.

MATERIAL/METHODS

There were 50 participants in this study. External DCR was performed on the same participant on both sides using local anesthesia on 1 side and general anesthesia on the other. Postoperative pain was measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS), and localization and timing of pain were reported by the participants. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were documented if present.

RESULTS

Pain levels were significantly higher with general anesthesia 3 hours post-surgery, and 6 hours post-surgery the pain remains higher following general anesthesia but is borderline insignificant (p=0.051). However, 12 hours post-surgery, there is no significant difference in the pain level (p=0.240). There was no significant difference in the localization of pain with local and general anesthesia. Postoperative nausea is significantly more frequent after general anesthesia, and vomiting only occurs with general anesthesia. Local anesthesia was preferred by 94% of the participants (47 out of 50).

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of patients in our study who have undergone both GA and LA DCR would choose LA again, providing a compelling case for use of the LA technique.

Pain during external dacryocystorhinostomy with local anesthesia

Background

External dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) is often performed under local anesthesia (LA) without adequate knowledge of the pain experienced by the patient.

Material/Methods

We subdivided our surgical technique into stages easily understood by the patients (introducing cotton tipped applicators, performing parabulbar injection, creating the incision, bone cracking (opening the ostium), manipulating the nose, intubating, closing the wound, and packing with gauze). A total of 50 patients ranging in age from 31 to 83 years of age (63.64±9.64) underwent external DCR. Each patient was asked 30 minutes after surgery to indicate the intensity of pain experienced at each stage of the surgery and during intramuscular (IM) injection of an antibiotic using a visual analog scale (VAS).

Results

Analysis of the VAS-based pain scores indicated 3 statistically equal occurrences of pain coinciding with the opening of the ostium, and receiving both parabulbar anesthetic and IM antibiotic injections.

Conclusions

The level of pain experienced during the most unpleasant stage of external DCR (ostium opening) was similar to the pain experienced from an IM injection. Patients can be informed that pain during external DCR with local anesthesia is comparable to receiving an IM gluteal injection.