Beyond dorsal penile nerve block: a more humane circumcision. Reduction in injection pain using buffered lidocaine as a local anesthetic before cardiac catheterization. A comparison of patient comfort during cataract surgery with topical anesthesia versus topical anesthesia and intracameral lidocaine. Randomized trial of buffered versus plain lidocaine for local anaesthesia in open carpal tunnel decompression. Comparison of three modified lidocaine solutions for use in eyelid anesthesia. Yoga during pregnancy: effects on maternal comfort, labor pain and birth outcomes. Immersion in water in the first stage of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Establishing intravenous access: a study of local anesthetic efficacy. Evaluation of lidocaine as an analgesic when added to hypertonic saline for sclerotherapy. Comparison of lidocaine injection, botulinum toxin injection, and dry needling to trigger points in myofascial pain syndrome. Lidocaine-assisted xylocaine jelly anesthesia versus one quadrant sub-Tenon infiltration for self-sealing sclerocorneal incision routine phacoemulsification. Comparison of the efficacy of different local anesthetics and techniques of local anesthesia in therapeutic abortions. Regional anesthesia during newborn circumcision. Effect on infant pain response. Intradermal anesthesia and comparison of intravenous catheter gauge. Unpreserved lidocaine to control discomfort during cataract surgery using topical anesthesia. Analgesic effects of intravenous lidocaine and morphine on postamputation pain: a randomized double-blind, active placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Efficacy of alkalinized lidocaine for reducing pain on intravenous and epidural catheterization. Topical lidocaine adrenaline tetracaine (LAT gel) versus injectable buffered lidocaine for local anesthesia in laceration repair. Topical tetracaine versus topical tetracaine plus intracameral lidocaine for cataract surgery. Intravenous lidocaine speeds the return of bowel function, decreases postoperative pain, and shortens hospital stay in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Peripheral streptomycin/lidocaine injections versus lidocaine alone in the treatment of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. A double blind controlled trial.
To explore techniques that can be utilized in addition to the dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB) to further reduce the neonate's stress and pain from routine circumcision, and thus make the procedure more humane.
                Level 1 nursery at a community hospital.
                Eighty healthy, term, newborn male infants scheduled for routine neonatal circumcision.
                Prospective and randomized; double blind and placebo controlled for the study solutions.
                Four statistically similar groups of 20 were studied. The control group included infants circumcised using: a) a rigid plastic restraint board; b) standard DPNB; and c) a pacifier dipped in water to comfort the infant. Each study group differed from the controls in one variable including: 1) using a specially designed, physiologic circumcision restraint chair; 2) pH buffering of lidocaine hydrochloride used for DPNB; and 3) offering a pacifier dipped in a 24% sucrose solution during the DPNB and circumcision. Behavioral observations were recorded and compared for each group starting before the injection of lidocaine hydrochloride and continuing through the completion of the circumcision. Plasma for cortisol levels were collected 30 minutes after the circumcision.
                Neonates circumcised on the new restraint chair showed a significant decrease in distress scores (>50%) compared with the control group on the rigid molded-plastic restraint. The pacifier dipped in sucrose had a distress-reducing effect during both the post-DPNB injection and circumcision periods. The infants who were injected with the buffered lidocaine showed no differences in distress from the controls. The plasma cortisol levels were not significantly affected by any additional technique and were comparable to the levels previously reported.
                When neonatal circumcisions are performed routinely, they should be done as humanely as possible. This study demonstrates that, when used in conjunction with DPNB, a pacifier dipped in 24% sucrose and a more comfortable, padded, and physiologic restraint can be useful in decreasing distress and pain. Previous reports have suggested that pain associated with the injection of lidocaine is related to the acidic pH of the solution. To determine if the addition of a buffering solution to adjust the pH of lidocaine into the physiologic range would reduce pain during injection, we performed a blinded randomized study in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. Twenty patients were asked to quantify the severity of pain after receiving standard lidocaine in one femoral area and buffered lidocaine in the opposite femoral area. The mean pain score for buffered lidocaine was significantly lower than the mean score for standard lidocaine (2.7 +/- 1.9 vs. 3.8 +/- 2.2, P = 0.03). The pH adjustment of standard lidocaine can be accomplished easily in the catheterization laboratory before injection and results in a reduction of the pain occurring during the infiltration of tissues. To determine whether intraocular lidocaine increases patient comfort during cataract surgery while under topical anesthesia.
                Prospective, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial.
                Both men and women between 45 and 85 years of age who were scheduled for elective cataract surgery while under topical anesthesia participated. Sixty-eight patients were randomized to each group.
                Patients were randomized to receive either topical anesthesia plus intracameral 1% preservative-free lidocaine or intracameral balanced salt solution.
                Patient assessment of pain during delivery of the anesthesia, surgery, and after surgery using a visual analog pain scale was measured. Patients also recorded the degree to which they were bothered by tissue manipulation and the microscope light. Surgeon assessments of operative conditions, patient cooperation, and intraoperative complications were recorded. The attending anesthesiologist recorded any required supplemental intravenous sedation and any increase in pulse or increase in blood pressure.
                There was no significant difference in patient-reported pain scores for delivery of anesthesia (P = 0.902), surgery (P = 0.170), or after surgery (P = 0.680). Patients in the lidocaine group reported being less bothered by tissue manipulation (P = 0.021). The surgeon assessment showed more patient cooperation in the lidocaine group (P = 0.043).
                Both topical anesthesia alone and topical anesthesia plus intracameral lidocaine provide good operative conditions for the surgeon and comfortable surgical circumstances for the patient. Injection of intraocular lidocaine increases patient cooperation and decreases the degree to which patients are bothered by tissue manipulation, two outcomes that justify its use. We performed a randomized double-blind case-control study in 64 consecutive patients undergoing open carpal tunnel decompression under local anaesthetic to assess the pain experienced on injection of plain lidocaine (pH 6.4) compared with lidocaine buffered with sodium bicarbonate (pH 7.4). The results showed no statistical difference in the pain scores reported by patients. The mean pain scores for all patients were low, and most patients reported that they were "not at all anxious" about receiving a similar injection in the future. To compare pain on injection and the efficacy of anesthesia of three modified lidocaine solutions for use in eyelid surgery: 1) 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine, 2) 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine buffered 9:1 with 8.4% sodium bicarbonate, and 3) 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine diluted 1:9 with 0.9% bacteriostatic saline solution (with benzyl alcohol).
                In this prospective, randomized, double-masked, controlled clinical trial, 30 consecutive patients undergoing bilateral identical eyelid surgery were randomized to one of three treatment groups. Group 1 received buffered solution on one side and stock solution on the other, group 2 received bacteriostatic saline diluted solution on one side and stock solution on the other, and group 3 received buffered solution on one side and bacteriostatic saline diluted solution on the other. Patients used a 5-point scale to rate the perceived pain on injection and the pain felt during the operative procedure.
                Comparison of mean injection pain scores showed that buffered solution was significantly less painful than unmodified solution (2.2 versus 3.1, p < 0.05), bacteriostatic saline modified solution was significantly less painful than unmodified solution (0.9 versus 3.3, p < 0.05), bacteriostatic saline modified solution was significantly less painful than buffered solution (1.2 versus 2.3, p < 0.05). Comparison of mean intraoperative pain scores demonstrated no significant difference between the solutions in any of the treatment groups.
                For local anesthesia in eyelid surgery, bacteriostatic saline modified solution provides more comfort on injection than either buffered or unmodified lidocaine-epinephrine solution and provides an adequate level of anesthesia that does not differ significantly from either the buffered or unmodified solutions. This study examined the effects of a yoga program during pregnancy, on maternal comfort, labor pain, and birth outcomes. A randomized trial was conducted using 74-primigravid Thai women who were equally divided into two groups (experimental and control). The yoga program involved six, 1-h sessions at prescribed weeks of gestation. A variety of instruments were used to assess maternal comfort, labor pain and birth outcomes. The experimental group was found to have higher levels of maternal comfort during labor and 2h post-labor, and experienced less subject evaluated labor pain than the control group. In each group, pain increased and maternal comfort decreased as labor progressed. No differences were found, between the groups, regarding pethidine usage, labor augmentation or newborn Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min. The experimental group was found to have a shorter duration of the first stage of labor, as well as the total time of labor. Current forms of analgesia often have significant side effects for women in labor. Bathing in warm water during labor has been reported to increase a woman's comfort level and cause a reduction in painful contractions. The objective of this trial was to compare immersion in warm water during labor with traditional pain management for a range of clinical and psychological outcomes.
                A prospective randomized controlled trial of 274 pregnant women, who were free from medical and obstetric complications and expecting a singleton pregnancy at term, was conducted at the Women's and Children's Hospital, a maternity tertiary referral center in Adelaide, South Australia. Women in labor were randomized to an experimental group who received immersion in a bath or to a nonbath group who received routine care. Pharmacological pain relief was the primary outcome that was measured, and secondary outcomes included maternal and neonatal clinical outcomes, factors relating to maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity, psychological outcomes, and satisfaction with care.
                The use of pharmacological analgesia was similar for both the experimental and control groups; 85 and 77 percent, respectively, used major analgesia. No statistical differences were observed in the proportion of women requiring induction and augmentation of labor or in rates of perineal trauma, length of labor, mode of delivery, or frequency of cardiotocographic trace abnormalities. Neonatal outcomes (birthweight, Apgar score, nursery care, meconium-stained liquor, cord pH estimations) revealed no statistically significant differences. Infants of bath group women required significantly more resuscitation than routine group women. Routine group women rated their overall experience of childbirth more positively than bath group women. Psychological outcomes, such as satisfaction with care or postnatal distress, were the same for both groups.
                Bathing in labor confers no clear benefits for the laboring woman but may contribute to adverse effects in the neonate. We performed a double-blind, randomized, prospective study to determine the local anesthetic that provided the best analgesia for insertion of an 18-gauge intravenous (i.v.) catheter and to determine whether alkalinization of lidocaine decreases the pain of intradermal injection. There were 280 healthy adult patients assigned randomly to seven different groups: benzyl alcohol 0.9% in normal saline, 2-chloroprocaine 3%, lidocaine 1%, lidocaine 1% with preservative, alkalinized lidocaine 1% with preservative, normal saline, and a control group that received i.v. catheter placement without previous drug injection. A 10-cm visual analog pain scale (VAPS) was used to obtain pain scores after pre-i.v. drug injection and after iv catheter insertion. Benzyl alcohol in normal saline (0.61 +/- 0.11) and alkalinized lidocaine (0.69 +/- 0.10) had the lowest mean pain scores for drug injection and these were significantly different from other drugs (P < 0.05). Alkalinized lidocaine (0.7 +/- 0.18) had the lowest mean pain score for i.v. catheter insertion with nothing (no previous drug injected) (3.47 +/- 0.38) and normal saline (3.97 +/- 0.18) had the highest mean pain scores (P < 0.05). We conclude that alkalinized lidocaine decreased the pain associated with its injection. Alkalinized lidocaine was the best local anesthetic for i.v. catheter placement. Benzyl alcohol in normal saline was also effective. The efficacy of sclerosing agents for the treatment of telangiectasias and reticular veins is well established. The injection of these agents is often associated with pain, and it is not uncommon for sclerotherapists to include lidocaine with the sclerosants in an attempt to reduce the pain associated with treatment. However, there are concerns that this may reduce the overall efficacy of the treatment because of dilution of the sclerosant. Patient comfort and overall outcome associated with treatment using HS with lidocaine (LIDO) versus that using HS alone was compared.
                Forty-two patients were prospectively entered into the study and randomized blindly to sclerotherapy with 23.4% HS or 19% LIDO. Study subjects and treating physicians were blinded to the injection solution used. Injection sites were chosen for veins ranging in size from 0.1 to 3 mm. Photographs of the area to be treated were taken, and the patients rated their pain. They were then observed at regular intervals for four months, and clinical data was collected. Thirty-five subjects completed the full follow-up period, and photographs of the injected area were taken again. Three investigators blinded to the treatment assignment then evaluated the photographs and scored the treatment efficacy according to a standardized system.
                In the HS group, 61.9% (13 of 21) patients rated their pain as none or mild, whereas 90.5% (19 of 21) of patients in the LIDO group had no or mild discomfort. This difference is significant, with a P value of.034. There was no difference in the overall efficacy of treatment between the two groups. The groups had similar rates of vein thrombosis and skin necrosis.
                Although lidocaine is often used with sclerosing agents, there are no previous reports in the literature to evaluate its effectiveness in reducing the pain experienced by the patient. In this study, patients receiving LIDO experienced significantly less discomfort at the time of injection than patients who received HS alone. There were no differences in the effectiveness of treatment or in the incidence of complications between the two groups. Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is one of the most common causes of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Several methods have been recommended for the inactivation of trigger points (TrP).
                This prospective, single-blind study was proposed to compare TrP injection with botulinum toxin type A (BTX-A) to dry needling and lidocaine injection in MPS.
                Eighty-seven trigger points (cervical and/or periscapular regions) in 23 female and six male patients with MPS were treated and randomly assigned to three groups: lidocaine injection (n=10, 32 TrP), dry needling (n=10, 33 TrP), and BTX-A injection (n=9, 22 TrP).
                Clinical assessment including cervical range of motion, TrP pain pressure threshold (PPT), pain scores (PS), and visual analog scales for pain, fatigue, and work disability were evaluated at entry and the end of the 4th week. Additionally, depression and anxiety were evaluated with the Hamilton depression and anxiety rating scales, and quality of life was assessed using the Nottingham health profile (NHP). The subjects were also asked to describe side effects. INJECTION PROCEDURE: One milliliter of 0.5% lidocaine was administered to each TrP in the lidocaine injection group, 10-20 IU of BTX-A to each TrP in the BTX-A group, and dry needling to each TrP in the last group, followed by stretching of the muscle groups involved. The patients were instructed to continue their home exercise programs.
                Pain pressure thresholds and PS significantly improved in all three groups. In the lidocaine group, PPT values were significantly higher than in the dry needle group, and PS were significantly lower than in both the BTX-A and dry needle groups. In all, visual analog scores significantly decreased in the lidocaine injection and BTX-A groups and did not significantly change in the dry needle group. Disturbance during the injection procedure was lowest in the lidocaine injection group. Quality of life scores assessed by NHP significantly improved in the lidocaine and BTX-A groups but not in the dry needle group. Depression and anxiety scores significantly improved only in the BTX-A-injected group.
                Injection is more practical and rapid, since it causes less disturbance than dry needling and is more cost effective than BTX-A injection, and seems the treatment of choice in MPS. On the other hand, BTX-A could be selectively used in MPS patients resistant to conventional treatments. To compare the effect of xylocaine jelly and intracameral lidocaine with one quadrant instant sub-Tenon infiltration for self-sealing sclerocorneal phacoemulsification.
                One hundred patients were enrolled into a prospective randomized study, receiving either a combination of topical 2% xylocaine jelly and 0.5 ml of intracameral 1% lidocaine or sub-Tenon infiltration with 2 ml of 2% xylocaine on the operating table. All patients underwent a standard divide and conquer phacoemulsification procedure through a superior sclerocorneal frown incision followed by implantation of a polymethylmethacrylate intraocular lens. Intraoperative pain was indicated by the patient by squeezing the bedside nurse's hand, who allocated it to particular stages of surgery on a chart. After surgery, patients assessed the pain experienced using a 10-unit visual analogue scale.
                Pain was indicated on 31 occasions during the operation in the sub-Tenon group (mainly the injection itself) and 67 times in the topical group. The median overall subjective pain score was 3 in the jelly group and 0 in the sub-Tenon. Five eyes (10%) had to be converted to sub-Tenon during the surgery because of intolerable pain.
                Whereas lidocaine supported xylocaine jelly anesthesia provided acceptable analgesia for 90% of patients operated, sub-Tenon anesthesia proved to deliver better intraoperative comfort in all patients receiving sclerocorneal incision cataract surgery. The objectives of this study were to determine whether carbonated or plain lidocaine provides better pain control during abortions and to determine whether deep injections of lidocaine provide better pain control than regular injections of lidocaine.
                Phase 1 was a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial comparing 10 cm3 of 2% carbonated lidocaine with plain lidocaine. In phase 2 the plain lidocaine group in phase 1 was compared prospectively with the next group of patients, in whom a new technique of deep injection was used. A pain scale was administered by the counselor after dilatation and at the end of the procedure.
                The improvement in pain scores with carbonated lidocaine was 8%. The improvement with the deep injection technique was 25%.
                The improvement in pain scores with deep injection was clinically significant and is recommended. A controlled, double-blind investigation was undertaken to determine whether regional anesthesia by dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB) could effectively minimize the pain and behavioral disruptions usually associated with newborn circumcision. Fifteen infants had DPNB with lidocaine, eight control infants had DPNB with saline, and eight additional control infants were circumcised without undergoing DPNB. Newborn distress was gauged by subjective observation, measurement of heart rate, and the percent of time spent crying in six sequential timed intervals during circumcision. Ninety-three percent of subjects who received lidocaine were observed to have a decrease in agitation after anesthetic administration. The mean increase in heart rate during circumcision was at least 50 percent less in the lidocaine injected group than in either control group (p less than 0.01). Infants who had DPNB with lidocaine cried 50 percent less during circumcision compared to combined controls (p less than 0.01). DPNB was easily administered, and there were no significant complications. Physicians who circumcise newborns have good reason to employ the technique of dorsal penile nerve block with lidocaine to minimize infant pain and distress. A double-blinded randomized prospective study was performed to determine whether alkalinization of lidocaine decreases the pain of intradermal injection and if a larger intravenous catheter (16 gauge) causes more discomfort on insertion than a smaller (20 gauge) catheter when intradermal anesthesia has been used. In a random manner, 100 patients received skin wheals with commercially prepared lidocaine or lidocaine with the addition of sodium bicarbonate before the insertion of a 16- or 20-gauge intravenous catheter. Visual analogue pain scores were obtained after the skin wheal was placed and after the intravenous catheter was inserted. There was no statistically significant difference in pain scores between the two local anesthetic solutions. However, the catheter insertions pain scores were slightly, but statistically significantly larger in the 16-gauge group regardless of local anesthetic solution used. The addition of sodium bicarbonate to commercially prepared lidocaine does not decrease the pain associated with an intradermal skin wheal. There is a slight increase in patient discomfort upon insertion of a large-bore intravenous catheter, even with the prior use of local anesthetic. To determine whether intraoperative unpreserved lidocaine further decrease discomfort or pain during sutureless small incision cataract surgery and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation under topical anesthesia.
                Outpatient ambulatory surgical center.
                In this prospective controlled study, comparable eligible patients were randomized to receive 0.1 cc unpreserved lidocaine 1% or 0.1 cc balanced salt solution (BSS) (control group) in double-masked fashion. Study drugs were injected intracamerally 1 minute before phacoemulsification. A predefined uniform pain/discomfort scale was used for assessment during phacoemulsification and IOL insertion. A secondary study using a 0.5 cc dose was also performed.
                Twenty-six percent in the control group and 9% in the lidocaine group had discomfort pain scores of 2 or more; 10% in the BSS group felt increased pressure or pain during phacoemulsification. In the lidocaine group, discomfort was felt mainly during IOL insertion, possibly as a result of wound manipulation. During phacoemulsification, no patient in the lidocaine group reported pain; 2% felt increased pressure during phacoemulsification. A dose increase to 0.5 cc reduced any intraocular sensation to 3% in the lidocaine group. No patient in either group had significant cell loss or adverse events.
                Intraoperative lidocaine is safe and effective in controlling intraoperative discomfort. Phantom and stump pains, common sequelae of limb amputations, are significant impediments to rehabilitation of amputees. The pathophysiology and optimal treatment of postamputation pain states are unclear. While stump pain may result from neuromas in the stump, phantom pain is thought to be related to cortical reorganization. The authors hypothesized that morphine and lidocaine may have differential effectiveness on stump and phantom pains.
                The authors conducted a randomized double-blind, active-placebo-controlled, crossover trial to compare the analgesic effects of intravenous morphine and lidocaine on postamputation stump and phantom pains. An intravenous bolus followed by an intravenous infusion of morphine (0.05 mg/kg bolus + 0.2 mg/kg infusion over 40 min), lidocaine (1 mg/kg bolus + 4 mg/kg infusion) and the active placebo, diphenhydramine (10 mg bolus + 40 mg infusion), were performed on three consecutive days. Phantom and stump pain ratings and sedation scores were recorded at 5-min intervals using a 0-100 visual analog scale. Pain measures were initiated 30 min before drug infusion and continued until 30 min after the end of infusion. Subjects' self-reported pain relief and satisfaction were assessed at the end of each infusion.
                Thirty-one of 32 subjects enrolled completed the study. Eleven subjects had both stump and phantom pains, 11 and 9 subjects had stump and phantom pain alone, respectively. Baseline pain scores were similar in the three drug groups. Compared with placebo, morphine reduced both stump and phantom pains significantly (P < 0.01). In contrast, lidocaine decreased stump (P < 0.01), but not phantom pain. The changes in sedation scores for morphine and lidocaine were not significantly different from placebo. Compared with placebo, self-reported stump pain relief was significantly greater for lidocaine (P < 0.05) and morphine (P < 0.01), while phantom pain relief was greater only for morphine (P < 0.01). Satisfaction scores were significantly higher for lidocaine (mean +/- SD: 39.3 +/- 37.8, P < 0.01) and morphine (45.9 +/- 35.5, P < 0.01) when compared with placebo (9.6 +/- 21.0).
                Stump pain was diminished both by morphine and lidocaine, while phantom pain was diminished only by morphine, suggesting that the mechanisms and pharmacological sensitivity of stump and phantom pains are different. To investigate whether increasing the pH of lidocaine could reduce the pain caused by its skin infiltration as well as that caused by intravenous and epidural needle insertion.
                A randomized, double-blind trial was undertaken in patients who were allocated to receive topical anesthesia with either plain (plain group; n = 25) or alkalinized lidocaine (alkalinized group; n = 25). An alkalinized lidocaine solution was prepared by adding 8.4% sodium bicarbonate to a plain 1% lidocaine solution at a ratio of 1 : 10. Pain was assessed using the verbal analog scale (VAS).
                In the alkalinized group, the VAS scores on skin infiltration in the hand (2.5 +/- 1.4) and the back (2.7 +/- 1.4) were significantly lower than the respective scores in the plain group (3.5 +/- 1.4, and 4.9 +/- 1.9). Although the VAS score on intravenous needle insertion did not differ between the two groups, the VAS score on epidural needle insertion was significantly lower in the alkalinized group (1.3 +/- 1.0) than in the plain group (3.6 +/- 1.3).
                Alkalinization of lidocaine was effective in attenuating pain on skin infiltration and on epidural needle insertion. The objective of the study was to compare topical lidocaine adrenaline tetracaine (LAT gel) with injectable buffered lidocaine with epinephrine regarding pain of application or injection and anesthesia effectiveness. The study was a randomized prospective comparison trial in an urban emergency department. Physicians and patients ranked the pain of application, injection, and suturing according to a 10-cm visual analog scale. Sixty-six patients were entered, 33 in the LAT gel group and 33 in the injectable buffered lidocaine group. Injection was found to be significantly more painful than application of gel (P < 0.001). For anesthesia effectiveness, there was no difference according to patients (P = 0.48) or physicians (P = 0.83) for topical vs injectable forms. The number of sutures causing pain was not statistically different in the two groups (P = 0.28). In conclusion, LAT gel compared favorably with injectable buffered lidocaine for local anesthesia effectiveness and was significantly less painful to apply. It may be the preferred local anesthetic for this reason. To compare topical tetracaine 0.5% alone and with intracameral lidocaine 1% as a local anesthetic agent in phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation.
                The Toronto Hospital-Western Division, Toronto, Canada.
                Fifty-nine consecutive patients (60 eyes) having phacoemulsification with implantation of a foldable acrylic IOL (AcrySof) were randomized into 1 of 2 groups: The intracameral balanced salt solution (BSS) group received topical tetracaine 0.5% plus intracameral BSS; the intracameral lidocaine group received topical tetracaine 0.5% with preservative-free intracameral lidocaine 1%. The patients' subjective experience of pain was measured at 4 points during surgery using a 4-point pain scale. Patient and surgeon satisfaction with the anesthesia used was measured using a 5-point satisfaction scale. Central endothelial cell counts were obtained preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was measured preoperatively and 1 hour, 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month postoperatively.
                The mean pain score after phacoemulsification was significantly higher in the intracameral BSS group than in the intracameral lidocaine group (0.63 +/- 0.7 [SD] and 0.23 +/- 0.4, respectively, P < .019). The mean pain score at the end of surgery was also significantly higher in the intracameral BSS group than in the intracameral lidocaine group (0.60 +/- 0.6 and 0.21 +/- 0.4, respectively; P < .014). The surgeon satisfaction score was significantly lower for the intracameral BSS group than for the intracameral lidocaine group (3.90 +/- 1.2 and 4.73 +/- 0.8, respectively; P < .0007). There was no difference in patient satisfaction between the intracameral BSS and intracameral lidocaine groups (4.60 +/- 0.6 and 4.70 +/- 0.8). Endothelial cell loss 1 month postoperatively was similar between the 2 groups (6.1% +/- 8% and 6.7% +/- 6%). Ninety-seven percent of patients (29/30) in each group noted BCVA improvement from preoperatively. The rate of potential visual acuity recovery was similar in both groups.
                Topical tetracaine 0.5% with intracameral lidocaine was safe and effective in patients having phacoemulsification with IOL implantation. The advantage of using intracameral lidocaine 1% over a placebo was a significant decrease in the patients' subjective experience of pain and in the surgeon's satisfaction with the anesthesia used. None of the other parameters measured in this study differed significantly between the 2 groups. Postoperative ileus is a concern among surgical patients. Epidural anesthesia and analgesia with local anesthetics can decrease the duration of ileus. Significant systemic absorption of local anesthesia occurs during epidural use. In this study, we examined whether many of the beneficial effects on bowel function seen with epidural lidocaine are also present when the drug is given parenterally. Forty patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy were studied with one half of the patients receiving a lidocaine bolus (1.5 mg/kg) and infusion (3 mg/min, unless weight <70 kg, then 2 mg/min); the other half received a saline infusion. A blind observer recorded the patient's daily pain score, the time the patient first experienced flatulence and had the first bowel movement, and the total use of analgesics. Lidocaine-treated patients first experienced flatulence in a significantly shorter time (P < 0.01) than control patients. Lidocaine patients' hospital stay was also significantly shorter (P < 0.05); on average, they spent 1.1 fewer days in the hospital. I.V. lidocaine initiated before anesthesia and continued 1 h postoperatively significantly sped up the return of bowel function. Lidocaine patients were also more comfortable postoperatively. Many of the bowel function benefits attributed to epidural lidocaine are also present when the drug is administered parenterally. Additionally, the length of hospital stay was reduced in lidocaine-treated patients. Implications: This study prospectively examined whether I.V. lidocaine could affect the return of bowel function after radical prostate surgery. Lidocaine-treated patients had shorter hospital stays, less pain, and faster return of bowel function. In this population, lidocaine infusion can be a useful adjunct in anesthetic management. Seventeen patients with long-lasting idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia (ITN) were treated with either five, weekly peripheral streptomycin/lidocaine (S/L) or lidocaine alone injections, in a double blind controlled study. Eight patients responded initially to the treatment in the S/L group and three patients in the lidocaine group. Pain recurred in four patients from the S/L group within two weeks and six months following the last injection. One patient from the lidocaine group remained pain-free for eight months. At the final assessment, three patients from the S/L group and two patients from the lidocaine group remained pain-free up to 30 months. Neither treatment affected sensory functions of the injected nerves. It is concluded that S/L injections are initially effective in the treatment of ITN. In the long term, however, their effects are similar to the effects of lidocaine alone.
Increasing the pH of lidocaine decreased pain on injection and augmented patient comfort and satisfaction.