BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to evaluate at the national level the current practice in the use of local anesthetics in cosmetic head and neck surgery and to compare the results with the novel local anesthesia technique used in the authors' department over the past 2 years. METHODS: A questionnaire was posted to all 211 board-certified members of the Association of German Plastic Surgeons. The questions related to the daily practice in rhinoplasty, blepharoplasty, otoplasty, face lift, and forehead lift. The focus was laid on anesthesia techniques, local anesthetics, vasoconstricting agents, dosages, activity onset, observed side effects, mean duration of each procedure type, and surgeon satisfaction with the anesthetic used. RESULTS: A total of 86 questionnaires (40.8 percent) were returned. The overall analysis revealed that local anesthetics were used in 88.9 percent of all cosmetic procedures of the head and neck. Prilocaine 1% (Xylonest; AstraZeneca, Wedel, Germany) was the most frequently used local anesthetic (32.0 percent), followed by lidocaine 1% (Xylocaine; AstraZeneca) and mepivacaine 1% (Scandicaine; AstraZeneca). Ropivacaine 0.2% (Naropin; AstraZeneca) was used only by 1.1 percent and ropivacaine 0.75% only by 0.9 percent (including two of the authors). Approximately half of the respondents (47.2 percent) used epinephrine 1:100,000 for vasoconstriction. In face lifts, the necessity of repeated "top-up" infiltration was reported in more than half (54.7 percent) of the procedures. Ten percent of surgeons surpassed the maximum recommended dosages when working without ropivacaine. Overall adverse cardiovascular effects were reported in 5.9 percent of rhinoplasties and 8.1 percent of face lifts performed mostly with prilocaine and lidocaine. No adverse cardiovascular reactions or overdoses were noticed with the use of ropivacaine. CONCLUSIONS: The survey showed a clear trend toward the increasing use of local anesthetics in cosmetic surgery of the head and neck. Although the use of prilocaine and lidocaine prevailed, adverse cardiovascular reactions in up to 8.1 percent seem high for cosmetic procedures. Furthermore, the need of additional intraoperative top-up infiltration adds to an uncontrolled cumulative effect and patient discomfort. On the basis of their positive 2 years of experience with ropivacaine, the authors strongly believe that ropivacaine offers significant advantages, both in efficacy and prolonged duration of analgesia, while reducing the risk for adverse side effects due to lesser toxicity. This observation deserves further investigation in an established comparative study.
BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to evaluate at the national level the current practice in the use of local anesthetics in cosmetic head and neck surgery and to compare the results with the novel local anesthesia technique used in the authors' department over the past 2 years. METHODS: A questionnaire was posted to all 211 board-certified members of the Association of German Plastic Surgeons. The questions related to the daily practice in rhinoplasty, blepharoplasty, otoplasty, face lift, and forehead lift. The focus was laid on anesthesia techniques, local anesthetics, vasoconstricting agents, dosages, activity onset, observed side effects, mean duration of each procedure type, and surgeon satisfaction with the anesthetic used. RESULTS: A total of 86 questionnaires (40.8 percent) were returned. The overall analysis revealed that local anesthetics were used in 88.9 percent of all cosmetic procedures of the head and neck. Prilocaine 1% (Xylonest; AstraZeneca, Wedel, Germany) was the most frequently used local anesthetic (32.0 percent), followed by lidocaine 1% (Xylocaine; AstraZeneca) and mepivacaine 1% (Scandicaine; AstraZeneca). Ropivacaine 0.2% (Naropin; AstraZeneca) was used only by 1.1 percent and ropivacaine 0.75% only by 0.9 percent (including two of the authors). Approximately half of the respondents (47.2 percent) used epinephrine 1:100,000 for vasoconstriction. In face lifts, the necessity of repeated "top-up" infiltration was reported in more than half (54.7 percent) of the procedures. Ten percent of surgeons surpassed the maximum recommended dosages when working without ropivacaine. Overall adverse cardiovascular effects were reported in 5.9 percent of rhinoplasties and 8.1 percent of face lifts performed mostly with prilocaine and lidocaine. No adverse cardiovascular reactions or overdoses were noticed with the use of ropivacaine. CONCLUSIONS: The survey showed a clear trend toward the increasing use of local anesthetics in cosmetic surgery of the head and neck. Although the use of prilocaine and lidocaine prevailed, adverse cardiovascular reactions in up to 8.1 percent seem high for cosmetic procedures. Furthermore, the need of additional intraoperative top-up infiltration adds to an uncontrolled cumulative effect and patient discomfort. On the basis of their positive 2 years of experience with ropivacaine, the authors strongly believe that ropivacaine offers significant advantages, both in efficacy and prolonged duration of analgesia, while reducing the risk for adverse side effects due to lesser toxicity. This observation deserves further investigation in an established comparative study.