title: Ophthalmic regional anesthesia: medial canthus episcleral (sub-tenon) anesthesia is more efficient than peribulbar anesthesia: A double-blind randomized study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Regional anesthesia and especially peribulbar anesthesia commonly is used for cataract surgery. Failure rates and need for reinjection remains high, however, with peribulbar anesthesia. Single-injection high-volume medial canthus episcleral (sub-Tenon's) anesthesia has proven to be an efficient and safe alternative to peribulbar anesthesia.
  
  
  METHODS
  The authors, in a blind study, compared the effectiveness of both techniques in 66 patients randomly assigned to episcleral anesthesia or single-injection peribulbar anesthesia. Motor blockade (akinesia) was used as the main index of anesthesia effectiveness. It was assessed using an 18-point scale (0-3 for each of the four directions of the gaze, lid opening, and lid closing, the total being from 0 = normal mobility to 18 = no movement at all). This score was compared between the groups 1, 5, 10, and 15 min after injection and at the end of the surgical procedures. Time to onset of the blockade also was compared between the two groups, as was the incidence of incomplete blockade with a need for supplemental injection and the satisfaction of the surgeon, patient, and anesthesiologist.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Episcleral anesthesia provided a quicker onset of anesthesia, a better akinesia score, and a lower rate of incomplete blockade necessitating reinjection (0 vs. 39%; P < 0.0001) than peribulbar anesthesia. Even after supplemental injection, peribulbar anesthesia had a lower akinesia score than did episcleral anesthesia. Peribulbar anesthesia began to wear off during surgery, whereas episcleral anesthesia did not.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Medial canthus single-injection episcleral anesthesia is a suitable alternative to peribulbar anesthesia. It provides better akinesia, with a quicker onset and more constancy in effectiveness.
authors.affiliation: Départements D'Anesthésie-Douleur et Urgence-Réanimation, Service d'Ophtalmologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Nimes, France. jacques.ripart@chu-rimes.fr
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Ripart
authors.forename: J Y
authors.initials: JY
authors.lastname: Lefrant
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Vivien
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Charavel
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Fabbro-Peray
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Jaussaud
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Dupeyron
authors.forename: J J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Eledjam
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000556:Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; D000765:Anesthesia, Conduction / Q000379:methods*; D018686:Anesthetics, Intravenous; D000779:Anesthetics, Local / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D002387:Cataract Extraction / Q000379:methods; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D006801:Humans; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D015742:Propofol; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D018686:Anesthetics, Intravenous; D000779:Anesthetics, Local; D015742:Propofol