Dataset Information

Patient pain during intravitreal injections under topical anesthesia: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Intravitreal injection (IVI) is a very common vitreoretinal procedure, and multiple injections are often required per patient. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of various local anesthetic techniques in reducing pain during injection. METHODS:A systematic review was conducted based on searches of Cochrane, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the gray literature (Google Scholar). The end search date was February 19, 2016, across all databases. We classified pain by converting visual analog scale (VAS) scores (0-100 mm) into Jensen's classification levels: 0-4, no pain; 5-44, mild pain; 45-74, moderate pain; and 75-100, severe pain. An intervention was considered clinically significant when pain score change was >12 mm on a 100-mm scale. RESULTS:Eight studies out of 23 met the eligibility criteria. The total number of patients was 847. Most studies (5/8 [62.5%]) were at unclear risk of bias because of unclear randomization, thus providing only moderate evidence to this review. The anesthetic techniques included eye drops with proparacaine, tetracaine or cocaine, a lidocaine pledget or gel, and subconjunctival injection of 2% lidocaine or 0.75% levobupivacaine. No study comprised all of the techniques. Pain was mild (VAS scores, 5-44 mm) regardless of anesthetic technique. A clinically significant intervention (pain score change >12 mm) was found for only one study comparing proparacaine drops, lidocaine gel, and subconjunctival lidocaine; in that study, a subconjunctival injection of 2% lidocaine provided the greatest pain reduction. A meta-analysis was not possible due to study heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS:Patient pain during IVI under topical anesthesia is mild regardless of anesthetic technique. A subconjunctival injection of 2% lidocaine could be an option for highly sensitive patients. However, with moderate level of evidence, no single anesthetic technique could be defined as the best option for IVI.

SUBMITTER: Shiroma HF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5494853 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient pain during intravitreal injections under topical anesthesia: a systematic review.

Shiroma Helio Francisco HF Takaschima Augusto Key Karazawa AKK Farah Michel Eid ME Höfling-Lima Ana Luisa AL de Luca Canto Graziela G Benedetti Roberto Henrique RH Rodrigues Eduardo Buchele EB

International journal of retina and vitreous 20170703

<h4>Background</h4>Intravitreal injection (IVI) is a very common vitreoretinal procedure, and multiple injections are often required per patient. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of various local anesthetic techniques in reducing pain during injection.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review was conducted based on searches of Cochrane, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the gray literature (Google Scholar). The end search date was February 19, 2016, across a ...[more]

PMID: 28680703

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo test the safety and preliminary efficacy of rapid, nonpharmacologic anesthesia via cooling for intravitreal injections.DesignSingle-center, randomized phase 1 dose-ranging safety study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02872012).ParticipantsAdults 18 years of age or older with a diagnosis of exudative macular degeneration or diabetic macular edema requiring bilateral anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy were included.MethodsA handheld device was developed to provide anesthesia via cooling to a focal area on the surface of the eye before intravitreal treatment (IVT). In 22 patients undergoing bilateral IVT, 1 eye was randomized to receive standard of care (SOC) lidocaine-based anesthesia and the other eye received cooling-anesthesia at 1 of 5 different temperatures and cooling times. Subjective pain was assessed via the visual analog scale (VAS; range, 1-10) at 2 time points: (1) immediately after IVT and (2) 4 hours after IVT. Treated eyes were assessed for ocular safety 24 hours after IVT.Main outcome measuresWe determined the occurrence of adverse events in eyes treated with cooling anesthesia. Mean VAS pain scores immediately after IVT and 4 hours after IVT in eyes receiving cooling anesthesia were compared with eyes receiving SOC.ResultsA total of 44 eyes were treated, 22 with cooling anesthesia and 22 with SOC. No dose-related toxicity was found with cooling anesthesia. Mild, transient adverse events were recorded in 32% of patients treated with cooling anesthesia versus 44% of patients receiving SOC. The mean±standard error of the mean (SEM) VAS pain scores immediately after intravitreal injection were 2.3 ± 0.4 for patients receiving SOC and 2.2 ± 0.6 in patients receiving -10° C cooling anesthesia (P = 0.8). Mean±SEM pain scores 4 hours after injection were 1.6 ± 0.4 for SOC and 1.2 ± 0.5 in the combined -10° C arms (P = 0.56). Total mean±SEM procedure time was 124 ± 5 seconds for patients treated with cooling anesthesia versus 395 ± 40 seconds for SOC (P < 0.0001).ConclusionsUltra-rapid cooling of the eye for anesthesia was well tolerated, with -10° C treatment resulting in comparable levels of anesthesia to SOC with a reduction in procedure time.

Project description:ImportanceDespite the unquestionable effectiveness of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy (VEGF), there is ongoing controversy about potential systemic adverse effects. Besides the direct adverse effects of anti-VEGF agents, other factors associated with the injection itself, such as perioperative blood pressure fluctuations, may contribute to adverse events.ObjectiveTo determine blood pressure fluctuations during intravitreal injections.Design, setting, and participantsProspective observational study at a tertiary referral center (Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland). Consecutive patients scheduled for intravitreal injections were recruited. Data were analyzed between October 2017 and January 2018.Main outcomes and measuresSystolic and diastolic blood pressure, pulse rate, and oxygen saturation were recorded before, during, and after the intravitreal injection. An anxiety questionnaire was completed by all participants. Multivariate regression analysis was used to investigate potential factors associated with blood pressure rise during injections.ResultsTwo hundred one patients (92 women and 109 men) were included in this study, with a mean age of 68 years (range, 18-93 years). Mean (SD) systolic blood pressure increased from a baseline of 150 (20) mm Hg to 162 (24) mm Hg following the preparation procedure to 168 (24) mm Hg during the injection (P < .001). Mean (SD) diastolic blood pressure increased from 78 (14) mm Hg to 83 (37) mm Hg to 83 (16) mm Hg, respectively (P = .009). Mean (SD) pulse frequency increased from 76 (13) bpm to 80 (13) bpm (P = .005). In total, 23 patients (11%) had a systolic blood pressure greater than 200 mm Hg. This subgroup of patients had a mean (SD) perioperative systolic blood pressure increase from 182 (19) mm Hg to 214 (12) mm Hg, resulting in an increase of 32 (20) mm Hg (P < .001). Age and anxiety were to be next associated with systolic blood pressure rise.Conclusions and relevanceThe intravitreal injection process is associated with a transient increase in blood pressure. Most of the increase occurs following the preparation before the injection itself. This may constitute a risk factor for cardiovascular or cerebrovascular complications during treatment and could be of particular relevance in patients at high risk for such events and those receiving frequent injections. Future work may be needed to determine whether, in patients at risk for cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events, perioperative blood pressure monitoring or antihypertensive therapy needs to be considered.

Dataset Information

Patient pain during intravitreal injections under topical anesthesia: a systematic review.

Publications

Patient pain during intravitreal injections under topical anesthesia: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets