PURPOSE: In the United Kingdom the majority of vitreoretinal (VR) surgery is performed under general anaesthesia (GA). The aim of this study was to demonstrate the scope of local anaesthesia (LA) for VR surgery, to measure the acceptance of LA to patients and surgeons and to compare the surgical outcomes, complication rates and duration of the surgical procedures under LA and GA. METHODS: A case-control study was undertaken to compare 100 cases performed under LA with 100 matched cases performed under GA. The matching of cases was based on multiple criteria such as configuration and complexity of retinal detachment, the involvement of the macula, the number and site of retinal tears, presence and severity of proliferative vitreoretinopathy, experience of the surgeon and the type of the surgical procedure. A clinical audit was also carried out on 65 successive patients using a questionnaire to determine the acceptability of LA to patients and surgeons. RESULTS: Anatomical and visual success rates, and intra-operative and post-operative complications, were similar in cases carried out under LA and GA. The mean duration of the surgery (excluding anaesthetic time) was significantly shorter for LA than GA procedures (p < 0.001). The acceptance for LA was high for both patients and the operating surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: We found that VR surgery can be safely and efficiently performed under LA. Adoption of LA has increased our throughput.
PURPOSE: In the United Kingdom the majority of vitreoretinal (VR) surgery is performed under general anaesthesia (GA). The aim of this study was to demonstrate the scope of local anaesthesia (LA) for VR surgery, to measure the acceptance of LA to patients and surgeons and to compare the surgical outcomes, complication rates and duration of the surgical procedures under LA and GA. METHODS: A case-control study was undertaken to compare 100 cases performed under LA with 100 matched cases performed under GA. The matching of cases was based on multiple criteria such as configuration and complexity of retinal detachment, the involvement of the macula, the number and site of retinal tears, presence and severity of proliferative vitreoretinopathy, experience of the surgeon and the type of the surgical procedure. A clinical audit was also carried out on 65 successive patients using a questionnaire to determine the acceptability of LA to patients and surgeons. RESULTS: Anatomical and visual success rates, and intra-operative and post-operative complications, were similar in cases carried out under LA and GA. The mean duration of the surgery (excluding anaesthetic time) was significantly shorter for LA than GA procedures (p < 0.001). The acceptance for LA was high for both patients and the operating surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: We found that VR surgery can be safely and efficiently performed under LA. Adoption of LA has increased our throughput.