The anecdotal use of lignocaine and bupivacaine mixture as local anaesthetics (LA) in minor surgical operations is increasingly popular, despite a lack of evidence to support this practice. The infiltration of LA is frequently identified as the most unpleasant aspect of the whole surgical procedure. This study compared the level of infiltration associated pain when 1% lignocaine, 0.25% bupivacaine and their 1:1 ( v : v ) mixture were used in patients undergoing minor facial procedure. A prospective, randomised study was carried out on patients undergoing minor facial procedure at the day surgery unit. The Visual Analogue Score (VAS) at the time of infiltration, injected volume and number of injections were recorded and analysed between groups. A total of 94 patients were recruited. The average volume of LA injected was 2.5 ± 1.9 ml and the average number of injections was 2.3 ± 1.5. The lignocaine–bupivacaine mixture (VAS = 3.1 ± 0.4) was identified as the least painful agent ( p < 0.05), when compared to 1% lignocaine (VAS = 4.6 ± 0.4) and 0.25% bupivacaine (VAS = 6.4 ± 0.5). In this cohort, female patients consistently reported a lower VAS score for all groups, but this observation was not statistically significant ( p > 0.05) when compared to male patients. The mixture of lignocaine and bupivacaine was associated with less pain during skin infiltration when compared to individual agents. Thus, we recommend its use in facial surgical procedures involving LA as this practice allows us to improve patients comfort during their surgery.
European Journal of Plastic Surgery – Springer Journals
Published: Feb 1, 2009
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud