A comparison of topical or retrobulbar anesthesia for 23-gauge posterior vitrectomy

Assessment of patient-reported outcomes in vitreomacular interface disorders: A systematic literature review

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assess the impact of disease on quality of life from the patient's perspective. Our purpose was to provide an overview of current PROMs used for vitreomacular interface disorders: macular hole, epiretinal membrane, and vitreomacular traction. We review the content coverage of all identified PROMs, assess them against quality-of-life issues as identified from earlier qualitative studies, and assess their psychometric quality (measurement properties). We identified 86 studies that used a PROM and 2 qualitative studies on quality of life of patients with a vitreomacular interface disorder. Current PROMs used in vitreomacular interface disorders have a limited content coverage and unknown psychometric quality. The National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire was used most. None of the condition-specific PROMs used patient consultation during content development, and there is only a small overlap between the content of PROMs and quality-of-life issues in qualitative studies. Reporting of psychometric quality was sparse, and mostly limited to concurrent validity and responsiveness. There is a need for properly developed and validated PROMs in vitreomacular interface disorders.

Anesthetic Approach in Ambulatory Vitrectomy: Peribulbar Block vs. Balanced General Anesthesia

Background

Vitrectomy is one of the most common outpatient ophthalmic surgeries. The anesthetic technique used in outpatient surgery should contribute to a faster functional recovery, better pain control, and fewer complications. The aim of this study was to compare peribulbar block and balanced general anesthesia, in patients undergoing outpatient vitrectomy.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was carried out, including adult patients undergoing ambulatory vitrectomy, between January and February 2018. Peribulbar block or balanced general anesthesia was the independent variable analyzed. Clinical and perioperative variables were evaluated, namely, postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting in the postoperative period, intraoperative hypotension, patient satisfaction with the anesthetic technique, time to oral diet introduction and to hospital discharge, operating room occupancy time, and pharmacological costs. SPSS^® 27 was used for statistical analyses.

Results

Twenty-one patients were evaluated, 11 of whom underwent peribulbar block and 10 underwent balanced general anesthesia. Patients undergoing peribulbar block did not experience postoperative pain when compared to patients undergoing balanced general anesthesia (p=0.001). Intraoperative hypotension occurred in 18.2% of patients undergoing peribulbar block and in 70% of those undergoing balanced general anesthesia (p=0.03). Time to oral diet introduction (<1 hour vs. > 2 hours; p < 0.05), operating room occupancy time (70 vs. 90 minutes; p=0.027), time to hospital discharge (17 vs. 22.5 hours; p=0.004), and pharmacological costs (4.65 vs. 12.09 euros; p < 0.05) were lower in patients undergoing peribulbar block versus balanced general.

Conclusions

Peribulbar block seems to meet the criteria of an ideal anesthetic technique in outpatient vitrectomy surgery.

Evaluating the effectiveness of localized sub-Tenon's anesthesia in 23-gauge vitreoretinal surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of localized sub-Tenon's anesthesia for pain control during 23-gauge vitreoretinal surgery.

METHODS

Eighty patients were randomly divided into two groups as localized sub-Tenon's (group 1, n = 41) and retrobulbar (group 2, n = 39) anesthesia groups. In group 1, a small volume of anesthetic was injected into the sub-Tenon's capsules at the trocar entry sites. The 23-gauge vitreoretinal surgery was performed in all patients. In both groups, the pain levels during the surgical steps were evaluated using the visual analog pain scale.

RESULTS

Patients in group 1 experienced less pain than group 2 patients did during placement of the trocars and scleral depression (p = 0.041, p = 0.029). Pain during laser photocoagulation was higher in group 1 (p = 0.008). There was no serious complication due to anesthesia or surgery.

CONCLUSION

Localized sub-Tenon's anesthesia is as effective as retrobulbar anesthesia in many steps of vitreoretinal surgery for providing pain control. It can be considered an alternative form of local anesthesia.

Pain during pars plana vitrectomy following sub-Tenon versus peribulbar anesthesia: A randomized trial

Purpose

To compare pain during pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) following topical lidocaine jelly and sub-Tenon anesthesia versus peribulbar anesthesia.

Methods

Prospective, single-center, randomized study. Patients scheduled for PPV for macular hole (MH) or epiretinal membrane (ERM) at the Retina and Vitreous Section of the Department of Ophthalmology, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo were randomly assigned to one of two groups in a 1:1 allocation ratio. Patients assigned to Group ST received topical anesthesia with 2% lidocaine jelly followed by sub-Tenon anesthesia with 2–4 ml of 1% ropivacaine. Patients assigned to PB received peribulbar anesthesia with 4–6 ml of 1% ropivacaine. After PPV, patients in both groups were asked to rate the level of pain they felt during the entire procedure (including anesthesia administration and PPV) by pointing at a 0–100 Visual Analogue Pain Scale (VAS). Data regarding demographics, patient characteristics and surgical features were also collected.

Results

Fifty-four patients were enrolled in the study (26 in Group ST and 28 in Group PB). Baseline characteristics, including age, gender, and presence of comorbidities, were similar in both groups. The surgery performed was PPV alone in 10 and 14 patients in the ST and PB groups, respectively, and combined phacoemulsification and PPV in 16 and 14 patients in the ST and PB groups, respectively (p = 0.39, Pearson). Surgery duration (mean ± SD minutes) was similar in the two groups (62 ± 12 for ST and 70 ± 20 for PB, p = 0.09, t-Test). No patients needed supplemental topical or intravenous anesthesia during surgery. No sight- or life-threatening complication was observed in either group. VAS score was significantly lower in the ST compared to the PB group (median (interquartile range) was 1 (2.25–0) in the ST group compared to 11.5 (29.75–5) in the PB group, p< 0.0001, Wilcoxon).

Conclusion

In this study of patients who underwent PPV for MH or ERM, topical followed by sub-Tenon anesthesia was more effective in controlling pain during the whole vitrectomy procedure than peribulbar anesthesia. Compared to peribulbar anesthesia which is administered with a sharp needle, sub-Tenon anesthesia administered with a blunt cannula may be associated with a reduced risk of such adverse events as globe perforation, retrobulbar hemorrhage, and inadvertent injection of anesthesia into the optic nerve sheath.

A New Two-Step Anesthesia for 23- or 25-Gauge Vitrectomy Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and efficacy of topical anesthesia combined with subconjunctival anesthesia (termed two-step anesthesia) for 23- or 25-gauge pars plana vitrectomy or other posterior segment surgery.

METHODS

Patients (n = 90) requiring 23-/25-gauge vitrectomy or other posterior segment surgery were randomized into 3 groups. Group 1 received peribulbar anesthesia, group 2 received retrobulbar anesthesia and group 3 received two-step anesthesia. A 5-point visual analog pain scale (VAPS) was used to measure self-report of patient pain. Complications were recorded for subsequent analysis.

RESULTS

VAPS scores for overall intraoperative pain ranged from 0 to 3 (1.07 ± 1.07) in group 1, from 0 to 2 (0.69 ± 0.93) in group 2 and from 0 to 3 (1.06 ± 0.98) in group 3. Assessment of surgeon discomfort score ranged from 0 to 2 (0.31 ± 0.66) in group 1, from 0 to 3 (0.38 ± 0.82) in group 2 and from 0 to 2 (0.47 ± 0.62) in group 3. Both scores reveal no significant difference among the 3 groups. While there were no complications noted in group 1, there was an ocular perforation in group 2. Additionally, there were no complications in group 3 related to the anesthetic technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that two-step anesthesia is a safe and effective anesthetic approach for selected patients undergoing 23- or 25-gauge pars plana vitrectomy or other posterior segment surgeries. It may offer a viable alternative to peribulbar anesthesia and retrobulbar anesthesia for carefully selected 23- or 25-gauge cannular-access ocular surgeries.

Feasibility and safety of vitrectomy under topical anesthesia in an office-based setting

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of office-based vitreoretinal procedures.

Methods

Patients undergoing primary elective pars plana vitrectomy were elected for surgery in an office-based setting (performed in a minor procedure room under topical anesthesia [TA] and oral anxiolysis). Rates of surgical objective achievement, surgical timing, and comfort were recorded to evaluate feasibility. Intraoperative and postoperative adverse events were assessed to evaluate safety.

Results

Office-based vitrectomy surgery was performed in 34 eyes of 30 patients. The mean surgical time was 12.351 ± 8.21 min. Surgical objectives were achieved in 100% of cases. The mean best-corrected visual acuity improvement was 9.08 letters (P < 0.0001). During most parts of the procedure, no patient reported pain or discomfort. Neither intraoperative nor postoperative adverse events were reported until the final follow-up visit.

Conclusion

Office-based vitreoretinal procedures under TA could be as feasible and as safe as vitreoretinal procedures under conventional anesthesia.

A comparison between topical and retrobulbar anesthesia in 27-gauge vitrectomy for vitreous floaters: a randomized controlled trial

Background

To compare the safety and efficacy of topical anesthesia versus retrobulbar anesthesia in 27-gauge pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for vitreous floaters.

Methods

30 patients with vitreous floaters were randomized into Group T (topical anesthesia, proparacaine eye drop) and Group R (retrobulbar anesthesia), and underwent 27-gauge PPV. A 5-point visual analogue pain scale (VAPS) was used to assess patients’ pain experience of anesthesia and surgery procedure (during surgery, 2 h and 1 day after surgery).

Results

The VAPS of anesthesia procedure was 1.27 ± 0.59 for patients in Group R, while it was all 0 for patients in Group T (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference for VAPS during surgery (Group T: 1.13 ± 0.74, Group R: 0.67 ± 0.62, p = 0.67), 2 h (Group T: 0.80 ± 1.01, Group R: 0.67 ± 0.62, p = 0.67) and 1 day (Group T: 0.20 ± 0.41, Group R: 0.27 ± 0.46, p = 0.68) after surgery between these two groups. Only one patient (6.7%) in Group T required additional topical anesthesia during the surgery. Most of the patients reported the pain experience came from initial trocar insertion in both groups. None of the patients required post operative analgesia in both groups. No intraoperative or postoperative complications were noted in both groups.

Conclusion

This study suggested that topical anesthesia is a safe and effective anesthetic approach for patients with floaters who underwent 27-gauge PPV.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT03049163. Registered 8 February 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12886-018-0838-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Local versus general anaesthesia for adults undergoing pars plana vitrectomy surgery

BACKGROUND

Vitrectomy surgery is one of the commonest ophthalmic procedures performed across the world. It may be performed using general or local anaesthesia encompassing regional or topical anaesthesia depending on a number of factors, including patient suitability, and patient, surgeon or anaesthetist preference. There have so far been no evidence-based recommendations on the best form of anaesthesia for this intervention. There is no clear collated evidence base as to the best type of anaesthesia to reduce harm, and provide best surgical conditions and optimal outcome for patients.

OBJECTIVES

To compare local with general anaesthesia for adults undergoing pars plana vitrectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library and the reference lists of updated studies on the 25th of July 2016; MEDLINE via Ovid SP (1972 to July 2016) and Embase via Ovid SP (1972 to July 2016). In addition we searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) in July 2016. We searched the proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) up to July 2016 for information about other relevant studies.We also searched appropriate databases for ongoing reviews. We did not apply any language restriction. We assessed the search as up-to-date on the 25th of July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving comparison of different modalities of local anaesthesia with general anaesthesia for pars plana vitrectomy. We considered the following different modalities of local anaesthesia: sub-Tenon's anaesthesia, retrobulbar anaesthesia, topical anaesthesia, peribulbar anaesthesia. We planned to include cluster-randomized controlled trials. We excluded quasi-RCT trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors conducted independent searches and assessed identified studies for inclusion according to the prespecified selection criteria. Two review authors assessed trial quality and planned to extract the data.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no eligible studies that met our inclusion criteria and were therefore unable to perform a meta-analysis or conduct a methodological quality assessment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review failed to locate relevant clinical evidence to support or refute a pars plana vitrectomy performed with various modalities of local anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia. Good-quality clinical trials are needed to define the role of local versus general anaesthesia for pars plana vitrectomy.

Comparison of pain experience during 23-G vitreoretinal surgery under topical and retrobulbar anesthesia

The objective of this study is to compare pain and discomfort scores of patients during 23-G vitreoretinal surgery under topical and retrobulbar anesthesia without using sedation. A total of 157 patients with various vitreoretinal disorders were included in this study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: topical (group 1, n = 76) and retrobulbar anesthesia (group 2, n = 81). Patients underwent 23-G vitreoretinal surgery without using sedation. All patients rated the level of experienced pain during the surgical procedure using a visual analogue pain scale. Pain and discomfort scores while performing anesthesia were significantly higher in group 2 than group 1 (p < 0.001). Patients in group 1 experienced more pain than group 2 during trocar insertion, endolaser photocoagulation, and scleral indentation steps of surgery (for all; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in overall pain and discomfort scores and surgeon comfort scores between groups (p = 0.163, p = 0.097; respectively). None of the patients required additional anesthesia or sedation during or after the procedure. Topical anesthesia without using sedation is a safe and effective, alternative method for 23-G vitreoretinal surgeries in selected patients with various vitreoretinal pathologies.