Intravenous sedation for ocular surgery under local anaesthesia

J. F. Salmon, B. Mets, M. F.M. James, A. D.N. Murray

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

54 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Anterior segment ophthalmic surgery is commonly performed under local anaesthesia. In order to improve patient comfort, a variety of sedation techniques has been employed in the past. The object of this study was, firstly, to determine whether continuous intravenous sedation during surgery offered any advantages in patients premedicated with temazepam and metoclopramide, and, secondly, to compare midazolam to propofol for this purpose. Forty nine patients were randomly aliocated to receive no intravenous sedation (n=15), continuous propofol infusion (n=17), or continuous intravenous midazolam infusion (n=17) after peribulbar anaesthesia. Each technique provided cardiovascular and respiratory stability and aliowed early recovery with minimal postoperative sequelae. Unexpected ocular field movement occurred more commonly in the patients receiving intravenous sedation, although statistical significance was not shown (p=0.06). Significantly more patients in the intravenous sedation groups reported amnesia (p=0.03). Patient acceptability was good irrespective of the technique used. This study suggests that continuous sedation using propofol or midazolam is not beneficial and should be avoided in ophthalmic patients who have received a simple premedication.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)598-601
Number of pages4
JournalBritish Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume75
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1992

Fingerprint

Local Anesthesia
Midazolam
Propofol
Metoclopramide
Amnesia
Temazepam
Premedication
Eye Movements
Intravenous Infusions
Anesthesia

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

Cite this

Salmon, J. F. ; Mets, B. ; James, M. F.M. ; Murray, A. D.N. / Intravenous sedation for ocular surgery under local anaesthesia. In: British Journal of Ophthalmology. 1992 ; Vol. 75, No. 10. pp. 598-601.
@article{378d47282212413c9bed449a998b7877,
title = "Intravenous sedation for ocular surgery under local anaesthesia",
abstract = "Anterior segment ophthalmic surgery is commonly performed under local anaesthesia. In order to improve patient comfort, a variety of sedation techniques has been employed in the past. The object of this study was, firstly, to determine whether continuous intravenous sedation during surgery offered any advantages in patients premedicated with temazepam and metoclopramide, and, secondly, to compare midazolam to propofol for this purpose. Forty nine patients were randomly aliocated to receive no intravenous sedation (n=15), continuous propofol infusion (n=17), or continuous intravenous midazolam infusion (n=17) after peribulbar anaesthesia. Each technique provided cardiovascular and respiratory stability and aliowed early recovery with minimal postoperative sequelae. Unexpected ocular field movement occurred more commonly in the patients receiving intravenous sedation, although statistical significance was not shown (p=0.06). Significantly more patients in the intravenous sedation groups reported amnesia (p=0.03). Patient acceptability was good irrespective of the technique used. This study suggests that continuous sedation using propofol or midazolam is not beneficial and should be avoided in ophthalmic patients who have received a simple premedication.",
author = "Salmon, {J. F.} and B. Mets and James, {M. F.M.} and Murray, {A. D.N.}",
year = "1992",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/bjo.76.10.598",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "75",
pages = "598--601",
journal = "British Journal of Ophthalmology",
issn = "0007-1161",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "10",

}

Intravenous sedation for ocular surgery under local anaesthesia. / Salmon, J. F.; Mets, B.; James, M. F.M.; Murray, A. D.N.

In: British Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 75, No. 10, 01.01.1992, p. 598-601.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Intravenous sedation for ocular surgery under local anaesthesia

AU - Salmon, J. F.

AU - Mets, B.

AU - James, M. F.M.

AU - Murray, A. D.N.

PY - 1992/1/1

Y1 - 1992/1/1

N2 - Anterior segment ophthalmic surgery is commonly performed under local anaesthesia. In order to improve patient comfort, a variety of sedation techniques has been employed in the past. The object of this study was, firstly, to determine whether continuous intravenous sedation during surgery offered any advantages in patients premedicated with temazepam and metoclopramide, and, secondly, to compare midazolam to propofol for this purpose. Forty nine patients were randomly aliocated to receive no intravenous sedation (n=15), continuous propofol infusion (n=17), or continuous intravenous midazolam infusion (n=17) after peribulbar anaesthesia. Each technique provided cardiovascular and respiratory stability and aliowed early recovery with minimal postoperative sequelae. Unexpected ocular field movement occurred more commonly in the patients receiving intravenous sedation, although statistical significance was not shown (p=0.06). Significantly more patients in the intravenous sedation groups reported amnesia (p=0.03). Patient acceptability was good irrespective of the technique used. This study suggests that continuous sedation using propofol or midazolam is not beneficial and should be avoided in ophthalmic patients who have received a simple premedication.

AB - Anterior segment ophthalmic surgery is commonly performed under local anaesthesia. In order to improve patient comfort, a variety of sedation techniques has been employed in the past. The object of this study was, firstly, to determine whether continuous intravenous sedation during surgery offered any advantages in patients premedicated with temazepam and metoclopramide, and, secondly, to compare midazolam to propofol for this purpose. Forty nine patients were randomly aliocated to receive no intravenous sedation (n=15), continuous propofol infusion (n=17), or continuous intravenous midazolam infusion (n=17) after peribulbar anaesthesia. Each technique provided cardiovascular and respiratory stability and aliowed early recovery with minimal postoperative sequelae. Unexpected ocular field movement occurred more commonly in the patients receiving intravenous sedation, although statistical significance was not shown (p=0.06). Significantly more patients in the intravenous sedation groups reported amnesia (p=0.03). Patient acceptability was good irrespective of the technique used. This study suggests that continuous sedation using propofol or midazolam is not beneficial and should be avoided in ophthalmic patients who have received a simple premedication.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026760307&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026760307&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bjo.76.10.598

DO - 10.1136/bjo.76.10.598

M3 - Article

C2 - 1420042

AN - SCOPUS:0026760307

VL - 75

SP - 598

EP - 601

JO - British Journal of Ophthalmology

JF - British Journal of Ophthalmology

SN - 0007-1161

IS - 10

ER -