Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Allman, K. G.
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, I. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Allman, K. G.
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, I. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2002, Vol. 88, No. 5 676-678
© 2002 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Clinical Investigations

Comparison of articaine and bupivacaine/lidocaine for peribulbar anaesthesia by inferotemporal injection

K. G. Allman*,1, L. L. Barker1, G. C. Werrett1, P. Gouws2, G. D. Sturrock2 and I. H. Wilson1

1Department of Anaesthesia and 2West of England Eye Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK*Corresponding author

Background. Articaine is a novel amide local anaesthetic with a shorter duration of action than prilocaine.

Methods. In a randomized, double-blind study we compared the efficacy of 2% articaine with epinephrine 1:200 000 with a mixture of 0.5% bupivacaine and 2% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:200 000 for peribulbar anaesthesia in cataract surgery using a single inferotemporal injection. Eighty-two patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups to receive peribulbar anaesthesia with 6–7 ml of articaine or a bupivacaine/lidocaine mixture. Both solutions contained hyaluronidase 30 iu ml–1. Ocular movement was scored at 2 min intervals up to 10 min, at the end of surgery and at time of discharge from hospital. Time to readiness for surgery and any complications (proptosis, chemosis, pain) were recorded.

Results. The articaine group demonstrated a rapid onset of peribulbar block with mean time (SD) to readiness for surgery of 4.2 (4.5) min compared with 7.2 (5.7) min in the bupivacaine/lidocaine group (P=0.0095). The block obtained in the articaine group was dense with eye movement scores at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 min all significantly reduced (P<0.01 at each interval). There was also a faster offset of the block in the articaine group (P=0.0009). There was no difference in incidence of minor complications between the groups.

Conclusions. Two per cent articaine is safe and effective for peribulbar anaesthesia by inferotemporal injection and is a suitable alternative to the traditional mixture of 0.5% bupivacaine and 2% lidocaine.

Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 676–8


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
T. A. King, J. Mitchell, K. Altman, M. Ozdemir, and K. G. Allman
Articaine for sub-Tenon's and peribulbar anaesthesia in cataract surgery
Br. J. Anaesth., October 1, 2004; 93(4): 595 - 596.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
P. Gouws, P. Galloway, J. Jacob, W. English, and K. G. Allman
Comparison of articaine and bupivacaine/lidocaine for sub-Tenon's anaesthesia in cataract extraction
Br. J. Anaesth., February 1, 2004; 92(2): 228 - 230.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
M. Ozdemir, G. Ozdemir, B. Zencirci, and H. Oksuz
Articaine versus lidocaine plus bupivacaine for peribulbar anaesthesia in cataract surgery
Br. J. Anaesth., February 1, 2004; 92(2): 231 - 234.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.