Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2000
Comparison of oxymetazoline and lidocaine versus cocaine for outpatient dacryocystorhinostomy.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Meyer D R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of oxymetazoline combined with lidocaine versus cocaine for outpatient dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR).
METHODS: Twenty-seven patients underwent DCR with a combination of oxymetazoline 0.05% nasal spray and lidocaine 4% spray/pledgetts (oxy/lido) and were compared with 28 patients who underwent DCR with cocaine 4% pledgetts for nasal anesthesia and vasoconstriction. Most of the patients underwent standard external approach DCR: five patients in the oxy/lido group and four patients in the cocaine group underwent endoscopic DCR.
RESULTS: Patients in both groups reported being comfortable during and immediately after surgery. Visualization of the operative field was adequate, and surgery was successfully completed in all cases. Mean blood loss was 6.3 ml (+/-6.0) in the oxy/lido group and 7.3 ml (+/-6.4) in the cocaine group (p = 0.541). There were no cases of postoperative epistaxis requiring nasal packing or hospital admission in the oxy/lido group, whereas one patient in the cocaine group developed epistaxis 8 days after surgery, which required treatment. Success rate was similar in the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of oxymetazoline and lidocaine is effective for outpatient dacryocystorhinostomy. Patient comfort was adequate and blood loss not significantly different in comparison to cocaine. This combination provides effective nasal anesthesia and vasoconstriction, while avoiding the "hassle" and potentially greater risks associated with cocaine.
METHODS: Twenty-seven patients underwent DCR with a combination of oxymetazoline 0.05% nasal spray and lidocaine 4% spray/pledgetts (oxy/lido) and were compared with 28 patients who underwent DCR with cocaine 4% pledgetts for nasal anesthesia and vasoconstriction. Most of the patients underwent standard external approach DCR: five patients in the oxy/lido group and four patients in the cocaine group underwent endoscopic DCR.
RESULTS: Patients in both groups reported being comfortable during and immediately after surgery. Visualization of the operative field was adequate, and surgery was successfully completed in all cases. Mean blood loss was 6.3 ml (+/-6.0) in the oxy/lido group and 7.3 ml (+/-6.4) in the cocaine group (p = 0.541). There were no cases of postoperative epistaxis requiring nasal packing or hospital admission in the oxy/lido group, whereas one patient in the cocaine group developed epistaxis 8 days after surgery, which required treatment. Success rate was similar in the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of oxymetazoline and lidocaine is effective for outpatient dacryocystorhinostomy. Patient comfort was adequate and blood loss not significantly different in comparison to cocaine. This combination provides effective nasal anesthesia and vasoconstriction, while avoiding the "hassle" and potentially greater risks associated with cocaine.