Comparison of injection pain of articaine and lidocaine in eyelid surgery.
Author(s): Steele EA, Ng JD, Poissant TM, Campbell NM
Affiliation(s): Oregon Health and Science University, Casey Eye Institute, Portland, Oregon 97239, USA. firstname.lastname@example.org
Publication date & source: 2009-01, Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg., 25(1):13-5.
Publication type: Comparative Study; Randomized Controlled Trial; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PURPOSE: To compare the pain induced by tissue infiltration of lidocaine 2% with epinephrine 1:100,000 versus articaine 4% with epinephrine 1:100,000 for eyelid surgery. METHODS: Thirty patients undergoing bilateral eyelid surgery were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, double-masked study. Each subject received injections of lidocaine 2% with epinephrine 1:100,000 (Xylocaine) on one side and articaine 4% with epinephrine 1:100,000 (Septocaine) on the other for surgical anesthesia. The patients rated the pain of infiltration using a 100-mm visual analogue scale immediately after receiving each injection. The pain scores were compared using the paired t test. RESULTS: Twenty-two of the 30 patients (73.3%) rated the articaine injection as less painful than the lidocaine injection. The mean pain score for lidocaine was 42.60 +/- 24.74 and the pain score for articaine was 31.85 +/- 20.28 (p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, infiltration of articaine was less painful than lidocaine for eyelid surgery, making articaine an attractive alternative for local anesthesia.