PURPOSE: The authors compared the efficacy of local anesthetics levobupivacaine, bupivacaine, and lidocaine for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery. METHODS: A total of 135 patients presenting for vitreoretinal surgery under local anesthesia were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups. Group LB patients received 5 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine, Group L patients received 5 mL of 2% lidocaine, and Group B patients received 5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine for retrobulbar anesthesia via inferotemporal injection. Sensory and motor block durations were recorded. Intraoperative and postoperative pain was assessed by using verbal pain scala. Anesthesia efficiency, patient and surgeon satisfaction, and akinesia were assessed by using point scales. Hemodynamic data and adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: The demographic characteristics of patients, duration of surgery, and hemodynamic data in both groups were similar. The duration of motor and sensory block was longer in levobupivacaine and bupivacaine groups than lidocaine group. Pain on injection was found more frequent in Group L and Group B than Group LB and the difference between the Groups LB and B was significant (p<0.05). Surgeon and patient satisfaction were also higher and intraoperative pain was less in levobupivacaine group than lidocaine and bupivacaine groups. CONCLUSIONS:Levobupivacaine provides longer motor and sensory block duration and higher surgeon and patient satisfaction than lidocaine and bupivacaine when used for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The authors compared the efficacy of local anesthetics levobupivacaine, bupivacaine, and lidocaine for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery. METHODS: A total of 135 patients presenting for vitreoretinal surgery under local anesthesia were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups. Group LB patients received 5 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine, Group L patients received 5 mL of 2% lidocaine, and Group B patients received 5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine for retrobulbar anesthesia via inferotemporal injection. Sensory and motor block durations were recorded. Intraoperative and postoperative pain was assessed by using verbal pain scala. Anesthesia efficiency, patient and surgeon satisfaction, and akinesia were assessed by using point scales. Hemodynamic data and adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: The demographic characteristics of patients, duration of surgery, and hemodynamic data in both groups were similar. The duration of motor and sensory block was longer in levobupivacaine and bupivacaine groups than lidocaine group. Pain on injection was found more frequent in Group L and Group B than Group LB and the difference between the Groups LB and B was significant (p<0.05). Surgeon and patient satisfaction were also higher and intraoperative pain was less in levobupivacaine group than lidocaine and bupivacaine groups. CONCLUSIONS:Levobupivacaine provides longer motor and sensory block duration and higher surgeon and patient satisfaction than lidocaine and bupivacaine when used for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery.