Sub-Tenon's versus Topical Anesthesia for Effectiveness of Analgesia During Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) Pub Date : 2025-05-02 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/OPTH.S512750
Ghazal Valizadeh, Elliot Duong, Christopher Thang, Leigh D White
{"title":"Sub-Tenon's versus Topical Anesthesia for Effectiveness of Analgesia During Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Ghazal Valizadeh, Elliot Duong, Christopher Thang, Leigh D White","doi":"10.2147/OPTH.S512750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sub-Tenon's and topical anesthesia are the most common anesthetic techniques employed for cataract surgery. The objectives were to compare the effectiveness of intraoperative analgesia between the two techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was performed of three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) from inception until August 2023. Included were adult patients undergoing routine cataract surgery with sub-Tenon's or topical anesthesia. Excluded were studies using systemic medications and complicated surgeries. The primary outcome was intraoperative analgesia assessed by patient reported pain scores. Secondary outcomes were post-operative pain at 30 minutes and 24 hours, patient satisfaction, surgeon satisfaction and complications. Risk of bias was evaluated using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). Outcomes were statistically assessed with meta-analyses where able.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies with 1370 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Sub-Tenon's block provided better intraoperative analgesia with lower pain scores (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.36; p < 0.001) which remained significant on subgroup analysis of six studies with uniform pain scales (MD -0.84, 95% CI -1.22 to -0.47; p < 0.001). Instances of severe intraoperative discomfort requiring rescue regional anesthesia were reported with topical anesthesia. While there was no difference in pain scores at 30 minutes or 24 hours post-operatively, higher patient and surgeon satisfaction was found with sub-Tenon's anesthesia. Serious complications were rare, with a higher reported rate of posterior capsule rupture with topical anesthesia. Only two of fourteen studies were considered an overall low risk-of-bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Sub-Tenon's block provides marginally better intraoperative analgesia during cataract surgery over topical anesthesia. Both can be considered effective for uncomplicated cataract surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":93945,"journal":{"name":"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)","volume":"19 ","pages":"1475-1487"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12054639/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S512750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sub-Tenon's and topical anesthesia are the most common anesthetic techniques employed for cataract surgery. The objectives were to compare the effectiveness of intraoperative analgesia between the two techniques.

Methods: A systematic review was performed of three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) from inception until August 2023. Included were adult patients undergoing routine cataract surgery with sub-Tenon's or topical anesthesia. Excluded were studies using systemic medications and complicated surgeries. The primary outcome was intraoperative analgesia assessed by patient reported pain scores. Secondary outcomes were post-operative pain at 30 minutes and 24 hours, patient satisfaction, surgeon satisfaction and complications. Risk of bias was evaluated using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). Outcomes were statistically assessed with meta-analyses where able.

Results: Twelve studies with 1370 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Sub-Tenon's block provided better intraoperative analgesia with lower pain scores (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.36; p < 0.001) which remained significant on subgroup analysis of six studies with uniform pain scales (MD -0.84, 95% CI -1.22 to -0.47; p < 0.001). Instances of severe intraoperative discomfort requiring rescue regional anesthesia were reported with topical anesthesia. While there was no difference in pain scores at 30 minutes or 24 hours post-operatively, higher patient and surgeon satisfaction was found with sub-Tenon's anesthesia. Serious complications were rare, with a higher reported rate of posterior capsule rupture with topical anesthesia. Only two of fourteen studies were considered an overall low risk-of-bias.

Conclusion: Sub-Tenon's block provides marginally better intraoperative analgesia during cataract surgery over topical anesthesia. Both can be considered effective for uncomplicated cataract surgery.

亚腱麻醉与表面麻醉对白内障手术中镇痛效果的影响:一项meta分析的系统综述。
背景:亚腱麻醉和表面麻醉是白内障手术中最常用的麻醉技术。目的是比较两种技术在术中镇痛的效果。方法:对MEDLINE、EMBASE、CENTRAL三个数据库从建立到2023年8月进行系统评价。包括接受常规白内障手术的成人患者,手术采用亚tenon或表面麻醉。排除了使用全身药物和复杂手术的研究。主要结果是通过患者报告的疼痛评分评估术中镇痛。次要结局是术后30分钟和24小时疼痛、患者满意度、外科医生满意度和并发症。使用改进的Cochrane随机试验风险-偏倚工具评估偏倚风险(RoB 2)。在可能的情况下,采用荟萃分析对结果进行统计评估。结果:12项研究共1370例患者被纳入meta分析。Sub-Tenon阻滞术中镇痛效果较好,疼痛评分较低(SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.70 ~ -0.36;p < 0.001),在六项采用统一疼痛量表的研究的亚组分析中仍然具有显著性(MD -0.84, 95% CI -1.22至-0.47;P < 0.001)。严重的术中不适,需要救援区域麻醉的情况下,报告了表面麻醉。虽然术后30分钟和24小时的疼痛评分没有差异,但亚tenon麻醉的患者和外科医生满意度更高。严重的并发症是罕见的,表面麻醉后囊破裂的报道率较高。14项研究中只有2项被认为是总体低偏倚风险。结论:与表面麻醉相比,亚腱阻滞在白内障手术中提供了更好的术中镇痛效果。对于简单的白内障手术,这两种方法都是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信