Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32760093›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2020

Pain during pars plana vitrectomy following sub-Tenon versus peribulbar anesthesia: A randomized trial.

Jefferson A S Ribeiro, Daniel S Ribeiro, Ingrid U Scott, João Abrão, Rodrigo Jorge

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jefferson A S RibeiroSuperior School of Health Sciences, Amazonas State University, Manaus, AM, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5995-9193
Daniel S RibeiroDepartment of Ophthalmology, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Ingrid U ScottDepartment of Ophthalmology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
João AbrãoDepartment of Biomechanics, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Rodrigo JorgeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Universidade de São Paulo · BRPennsylvania State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare pain during pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) following topical lidocaine jelly and sub-Tenon anesthesia versus peribulbar anesthesia.

methodsProspective, single-center, randomized study. Patients scheduled for PPV for macular hole (MH) or epiretinal membrane (ERM) at the Retina and Vitreous Section of the Department of Ophthalmology, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo were randomly assigned to one of two groups in a 1:1 allocation ratio. Patients assigned to Group ST received topical anesthesia with 2% lidocaine jelly followed by sub-Tenon anesthesia with 2-4 ml of 1% ropivacaine. Patients assigned to PB received peribulbar anesthesia with 4-6 ml of 1% ropivacaine. After PPV, patients in both groups were asked to rate the level of pain they felt during the entire procedure (including anesthesia administration and PPV) by pointing at a 0-100 Visual Analogue Pain Scale (VAS). Data regarding demographics, patient characteristics and surgical features were also collected.

resultsFifty-four patients were enrolled in the study (26 in Group ST and 28 in Group PB). Baseline characteristics, including age, gender, and presence of comorbidities, were similar in both groups. The surgery performed was PPV alone in 10 and 14 patients in the ST and PB groups, respectively, and combined phacoemulsification and PPV in 16 and 14 patients in the ST and PB groups, respectively (p = 0.39, Pearson). Surgery duration (mean ± SD minutes) was similar in the two groups (62 ± 12 for ST and 70 ± 20 for PB, p = 0.09, t-Test). No patients needed supplemental topical or intravenous anesthesia during surgery. No sight- or life-threatening complication was observed in either group. VAS score was significantly lower in the ST compared to the PB group (median (interquartile range) was 1 (2.25-0) in the ST group compared to 11.5 (29.75-5) in the PB group, p< 0.0001, Wilcoxon).

conclusionIn this study of patients who underwent PPV for MH or ERM, topical followed by sub-Tenon anesthesia was more effective in controlling pain during the whole vitrectomy procedure than peribulbar anesthesia. Compared to peribulbar anesthesia which is administered with a sharp needle, sub-Tenon anesthesia administered with a blunt cannula may be associated with a reduced risk of such adverse events as globe perforation, retrobulbar hemorrhage, and inadvertent injection of anesthesia into the optic nerve sheath.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, LocalAnesthetics, LocalLidocaineRopivacaineVitrectomyAgedFemaleHumansInjectionsInjections, IntraocularMaleMiddle AgedPain ManagementPain MeasurementProspective StudiesAnesthetics, LocalLidocaineRopivacaine

Identifiers

PMID32760093
PMCPMC7410239
OpenAlexW3047729517

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.