The Experts below are selected from a list of 2169 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Arie L Marcovich - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
topical tetracaine versus topical tetracaine plus intracameral lidocaine for cataract surgery
Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 1998Co-Authors: Noel S Carino, Allan R Slomovic, Frances Chung, Arie L MarcovichAbstract:Abstract Purpose: To compare topical tetracaine 0.5% alone and with intracameral lidocaine 1% as a Local Anesthetic Agent in phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Setting: The Toronto Hospital—Western Division; Toronto, Canada. Methods: Fifty-trine consecutive patients (60 eyes) having phacoemulsification with implantation of a foldable acrylic IOL (AcrySot) 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 preservabve-free intracameral lidocaine 1%. The patients' subjective experience of pain ,vvas 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 pfeoperatively and 1 hour, i day, 1 week, and 1 month postoperatively. Results: The mean pain score after phaccemulsfication 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 P P Conclusion: Topical tetracaine 0.5% with intracameral lidocaine was safe and effective in patients having phacoemulsifcation 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.
Noel S Carino - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
topical tetracaine versus topical tetracaine plus intracameral lidocaine for cataract surgery
Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 1998Co-Authors: Noel S Carino, Allan R Slomovic, Frances Chung, Arie L MarcovichAbstract:Abstract Purpose: To compare topical tetracaine 0.5% alone and with intracameral lidocaine 1% as a Local Anesthetic Agent in phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Setting: The Toronto Hospital—Western Division; Toronto, Canada. Methods: Fifty-trine consecutive patients (60 eyes) having phacoemulsification with implantation of a foldable acrylic IOL (AcrySot) 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 preservabve-free intracameral lidocaine 1%. The patients' subjective experience of pain ,vvas 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 pfeoperatively and 1 hour, i day, 1 week, and 1 month postoperatively. Results: The mean pain score after phaccemulsfication 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 P P Conclusion: Topical tetracaine 0.5% with intracameral lidocaine was safe and effective in patients having phacoemulsifcation 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.
Hae Jin Lee - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Intrauterine fetal bradycardia after accidental administration of the Anesthetic Agent in the subdural space during epidural labor analgesia -A case report-
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 2013Co-Authors: Ho Sik Moon, Jin Young Chon, Weon Joon Yang, Hae Jin LeeAbstract:Lumbar epidural anesthesia is considered a relatively safe procedure during labor pain; however, life-threatening complications that cause both maternal and fetal crises occur occasionally. These complications include accidental intravascular, intrathecal, or subdural injection as well as, considerable or total spinal block [1]. Injection of the Local Anesthetic Agent into the subdural space causes critical complications such as severe hypotension, progressive respiratory depression, and cardiac arrest [2]. The fetus is also affected in cases of maternal complications. Therefore, the doctor administering the epidural Anesthetic Agent should be aware of possible complications. Only a few studies have reported accidental subdural injections during lumbar epidural analgesia administration for labor pain and the need for subsequent intrauterine fetal resuscitation, therefore, we present a case report and a literature review of intrauterine fetal resuscitation after subdural Anesthetic injection.
Chihsiang Huang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
neurotoxicity of a novel Local Anesthetic Agent ropivacaine the possible roles of bursts of potential and cytoplasmic second messenger
Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 2007Co-Authors: Peilin Lin, Shouzen Fan, Fengfong Tsai, Mingcheng Tsai, Chiahsien Lin, Chihsiang HuangAbstract:Background/Purpose Ropivacaine has been shown to induce convulsion following overdose or accidental intravenous injection, but the mechanisms are poorly understood. Using an identifiable central neuron from giant African snail, the authors studied the mechanism of ropivacaine-elicited bursts of potential and explored the possible mechanisms of ropivacaine-induced neurotoxicity. Methods Ropivacaine action on a central neuron (RP4) of the giant African snail (Achatina fulica Ferussac) was recorded by conventional electrophysiologic technique. Interactions between ropivacaine and prazosin, propranolol, atropine, d-tubocurarine, calcium-free solution, H89, U73122, neomycin, high-magnesium solution, and chelerythrine were also observed. Results The RP4 neuron showed spontaneous firing of action potentials. Extracellular application of ropivacaine (900 μM) reversibly elicited bursts of potential in the RP4 neuron. The bursts of potential elicited by ropivacaine were not blocked after administration of: (1) prazosin, propranolol, atropine, d-tubocurarine; (2) calcium-free solution; and (3) pretreatment with H89 or chelerythrine. The bursts of potential elicited by ropivacaine were blocked by pretreatment with U73122 (30 μM) or by adding neomycin (3.5 mM) or high-magnesium solution (30 mM). Conclusion Ropivacaine reversibly elicited bursts of potential in the central snail neuron. The ropivacaine-elicited bursts of potential were associated with phospholipase C activity in the RP4 snail neuron. Our results suggest that ropivacaine-induced neurotoxicity is highly associated with phospholipase C activity and phospholipase C inhibitor may offer a novel therapeutic approach for managing Local Anesthetic-induced convulsion or other transient neurologic toxicity.
-
neurotoxicity of a novel Local Anesthetic Agent ropivacaine the possible roles of bursts of potential and cytoplasmic
2007Co-Authors: Peilin Lin, Shouzen Fan, Fengfong Tsai, Mingcheng Tsai, Chiahsien Lin, Chihsiang HuangAbstract:Background/Purpose: Ropivacaine has been shown to induce convulsion following overdose or accidental intravenous injection, but the mechanisms are poorly understood. Using an identifiable central neuron from giant African snail, the authors studied the mechanism of ropivacaine-elicited bursts of potential and explored the possible mechanisms of ropivacaine-induced neurotoxicity. Methods: Ropivacaine action on a central neuron (RP4) of the giant African snail (Achatina fulica Ferussac) was recorded by conventional electrophysiologic technique. Interactions between ropivacaine and prazosin, propranolol, atropine, d-tubocurarine, calcium-free solution, H89, U73122, neomycin, high-magnesium solution, and chelerythrine were also observed. Results: The RP4 neuron showed spontaneous firing of action potentials. Extracellular application of ropivacaine (900 µM) reversibly elicited bursts of potential in the RP4 neuron. The bursts of potential elicited by ropivacaine were not blocked after administration of: (1) prazosin, propranolol, atropine, d-tubocurarine; (2) calcium-free solution; and (3) pretreatment with H89 or chelerythrine. The bursts of potential elicited by ropivacaine were blocked by pretreatment with U73122 (30 µM) or by adding neomycin (3.5 mM) or high-magnesium solution (30 mM). Conclusion: Ropivacaine reversibly elicited bursts of potential in the central snail neuron. The ropivacaine-elicited bursts of potential were associated with phospholipase C activity in the RP4 snail neuron. Our results suggest that ropivacaine-induced neurotoxicity is highly associated with phospholipase C activity and phospholipase C inhibitor may offer a novel therapeutic approach for managing Local Anesthetic-induced convulsion or other transient neurologic toxicity. [J Formos Med Assoc 2007; 106(10):815–825]
Allan R Slomovic - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
topical tetracaine versus topical tetracaine plus intracameral lidocaine for cataract surgery
Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 1998Co-Authors: Noel S Carino, Allan R Slomovic, Frances Chung, Arie L MarcovichAbstract:Abstract Purpose: To compare topical tetracaine 0.5% alone and with intracameral lidocaine 1% as a Local Anesthetic Agent in phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Setting: The Toronto Hospital—Western Division; Toronto, Canada. Methods: Fifty-trine consecutive patients (60 eyes) having phacoemulsification with implantation of a foldable acrylic IOL (AcrySot) 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 preservabve-free intracameral lidocaine 1%. The patients' subjective experience of pain ,vvas 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 pfeoperatively and 1 hour, i day, 1 week, and 1 month postoperatively. Results: The mean pain score after phaccemulsfication 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 P P Conclusion: Topical tetracaine 0.5% with intracameral lidocaine was safe and effective in patients having phacoemulsifcation 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.