Clinical Comparison of Bupivacaine and Lidocaine for Local Anesthesia in Glaucoma Surgery

Nemat Ibragimov

Department of Anesteziologiya va Reanimatologiya, Tashkent Medical Academy, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

Norbuvi Bektemirova

Department of Anesteziologiya va Reanimatologiya, Tashkent Medical Academy, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

Guzal Kangilbaeva *

Department of Ophthalmology, Tashkent Medical Academy, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

Abror Alimov

Department of Anesteziologiya va Reanimatologiya, Tashkent Medical Academy, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

Aims: To compare the clinical efficacy of bupivacaine and lidocaine for regional glaucoma surgical anesthesia.

Study Design: Cross-sectional comparative analysis

Place and Duration of Study: Department of Ophthalmology, clinic of Tashkent Medical Academy, between 2022 and 2024.

Methodology: We included 60 patients (60 eyes) with glaucoma; 28 men and 32 women; age range was 45-80 years. The patients were divided into two groups: 1st - 30 patients with lidocaine anesthesia and 2nd - 30 patients with bupivacaine anesthesia. The criteria for comparing the groups were: The rapidity of regional anesthesia, its duration, the general well-being of patients, the intensity of pain during the operation and in the early postoperative period on a visual analogue scale.

Results: In all patients of the 1st group anesthesia was achieved within 5-7 minutes, its duration was 40-50 minutes. In the second group anesthesia came later, after 10-14 minutes, but its duration was much longer, averaging 3 hours. Full ophthalmoplegia was received in 10 patients (33%) of the 1st group, and 21 patients (70%) of the 2nd group. Fifteen patients with bupivacaine and twelve patients with lidocaine had no pain during surgery. 8 (13%) patients experienced moderate pain (3-5 points). Five of them were operated under lidocaine anesthesia, three of which were operated with bupivacaine. Three patients experienced severe pain (6-10 points). Of these, two patients were operated on with lidocaine, and only one patient was operated. The average pain intensity was 2.0 ±0.4, and 1.4 ±0.3 with lidocaine and bupivacaine, respectively. Statistically significant differences between these groups for intraoperative pain syndrome are not obtained (p = 0.3).

Conclusion: Good analgesic effect was achieved in all patients of both groups. Anesthesia with lidocaine occurs quickly, and anesthesia with bupivacaine is longer and better. The use of bupivacaine was associated with lower pain levels due to the longer duration of anesthesia, which has improved the quality of life.

Keywords: Anesthesia, anti-glaucoma surgery, pain intensity, visual analogue scale, bupivacaine


How to Cite

Ibragimov, N., Bektemirova, N., Kangilbaeva, G., & Alimov, A. (2024). Clinical Comparison of Bupivacaine and Lidocaine for Local Anesthesia in Glaucoma Surgery. Asian Journal of Research and Reports in Ophthalmology, 7(1), 80–84. Retrieved from https://journalajrrop.com/index.php/AJRROP/article/view/101

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Stewart J, Kellett N, Castro D. The central nervous system and cardiovascular Effects of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine in healthy volunteers. Anesth Analg. 2003;97 (2):412-416.

Di Donato A, Fontana C, Lancia F. et al. Levobupivacaine 0.75% vs. lidocaine 4% for topical anaesthesia: A clinical comparison in cataract surgery. European Journal of Anaesthesiology. 2007;24(5): 438-440.

Fernandez SA, Dios E. and Diz JC. Comparative study of topical anaesthesia with lidocaine 2% vs levobupivacaine 0.75% in cataract surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2009;102(2):216-220.

Birt DJ., Cummings GC. The efficacy and safety of 0.75% levobupivacaine vs 0.75% bupivacaine for peribulbar anaesthesia. Eye. 2003;17(2):200-206.

Di Donato A, Fontana C, Lancia F, Celleno D. Efficacy and comparison of 0.5% levobupivacaine with 0.75% ropivacaine for peribulbar anaesthesia in cataract surgery. European Journal of Anaesthesiology. 2006;23(6):487-490.

Ghali AM. The efficacy of 0.75% levobupivacaine versus 0.75% ropivacaine for peribulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia. 2012;6(1):22-26.

McLure HA., Rubin AP. Comparison of 0.75% levobupivacaine with 0.75% racemic bupivacaine for peribulbar anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 1998;53(12): 1160-1164.

Pacella E, Collini S, Pacella F, De Blasi RA. Levobupivacaine vs. racemic bupivacaine in peribulbar anaesthesia: a randomized double blind study in ophthalmic surgery. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences. 2010;14(6):539-544.

Pacella E, Pacella F, Troisi F. et al. Efficacy and safety of 0.5% levobupivacaine versus 0.5% bupivacaine for per bulbar anesthesia. Clinical Ophthalmology. 2013;(7):927-932.

Aksu R, Bicer C, Ozkiris A. et al. Comparison of 0.5% levobupivacaine, 0.5% bupivacaine, and 2% lidocaine for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery. European Journal of Ophthalmology. 2009;19(2):280-284.

Ghali AM, Shabana AM, ElBtarny AM. The effect of low-dose Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in patients undergoing vitreoretinal surgery under sub-tenon’s block anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2015;121(5):1378-1382.

Nauman A, Zahoor A, Al Assin A. et al. Comparison of Levobupivacaine 0,5% or Bupivacaine 0,5% Both in a mixture with Lidocaine 2% for superficial extraconal blockade. Middle East Afr J Ophtalmol. 2012;19(3):330-333.

Kangilbaeva G, Bakhritdinova F, Nazirova S, Jurabekova A. Training of Medical Students during and after the COVID-19 Pandemiс in Uzbekistan. Asian Journal of Research and Reports in Ophthalmology. 2022;5(3):17-20.

Kangilbaeva G, Jurabekova A. Effect of EGb 761 (Tanakan)Therapy in Eyes with Nonproliferative Diabetic Retinopathy. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research. 2020;12(Suppl.Issue2):3019-3023. Available:https://doi.org/10.31838/ijpr/2020.SP2.317

Kangilbaeva G, Bakhritdinova F, Oralov B, Jurabekova A. Functional and Hemodynamic Efficacy of Non-Poliferative Diabetic Retinopathy Treatment by Endonasal Electrophoresis of Tanakan. Ophthalmol. Res. Int. J. 2023; 18(1): 1-9. Available:https://doi.org/10.9734/or/2023/v18i1374

Kangilbaeva G, Bakhritdinova F, Urmanova F. Assessing the Dynamics of Antioxidant Protection of Tear Fluid and Retrobulbar Blood Circulation in Diabetic Retinopathy. New Horizons in Medicine and Medical Research. 2022;(4): 83–90. Available:https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/nhmmr/v4/2000B

Bakhritdinova FA, Kangilbaeva GE, Nabieva IF, Jurabekova AZ. Prediction of the progression of diabetic retinopathy based on hemodynamic data. J. ophthalmol (Ukraine) 2021;4:26-31. Available:http://doi.org/10.31288/oftalmolzh202142631

Kangilbaeva G, Bakhritdinova F, Nabieva I, Jurabekova A. Eye hemodynamic data and biochemical parameters of the lacrimal fluid of patients with non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Data in Brief 2020;32: 106237. Available:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.106237 Available:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32923547/

Balakrishnan K, Ebenezer V, Dakir A, Kumar S, Prakash D. Bupivacaine versus lignocaine as the choice of locall anesthetic agent for impacted third molar surgery a review. Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences. 2015;7(Suppl 1):S230–3. Available:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4439680/

Oji E, Oji A. Bupivacaine and lignocaine for ophthalmic surgery. British Journal of Ophthalmology. 1987;71(1):66–8. Available:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1041086/