Ophthalmic artery resistance index after peribulbar block in the presence of epinephrine
Carregando...
Data
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
Descrição
Tipo
Artigo de periódico
Título alternativo
Primeiro orientador
Membros da banca
Resumo
Purpose There are controversies regarding ophthalmic artery (OA) flow after peribulbar block in the presence of epinephrine. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate OA flow via echo-Doppler before and after peribulbar block with lidocaine in the presence or absence of epinephrine. Methods Fifty-six patients who had an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of I, II or III and were eligible for cataract phacoemulsification surgery were selected. Patients with other eye diseases were excluded. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1—peribulbar block with lidocaine and 1/200,000 epinephrine; group 2—peribulbar block with lidocaine in the absence of epinephrine. The resistance index (RI), peak systolic velocity (PSV), end diastolic velocity (EDV) of the OA were evaluated
using echo-Doppler before and 10 min after the peribulbar block. Results No differences between groups were observed in the RI before the peribulbar block as well regarding the presence of hypertension and the age or gender of the patient. After the peribulbar block, we observed a decrease in the RI in group 1 (p = 0.038, Cohen’s d = 0.336) and no difference in the RI in group 2 (p = 0.109, Cohen’s d = 0.172). When comparing group 1 and group 2, we observed a decrease in the RI in group 1 (p = 0.028, Cohen’s d = 0,583). There was no difference between groups regarding the PSV and EDV after the peribulbar block.Conclusions A decrease in RI was observed in the OA after peribulbar block with a vasoconstrictor, an effect that could be a benefit in some ocular surgeries
Abstract
Assunto
Extração de Catarata, Artéria Oftálmica
Palavras-chave
Ocular flow, Cataract surgery, Peribulbar bloc, Ocular Doppler
Citação
Curso
Endereço externo
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10792-020-01567-2