-
Iranian Journal of Medical Sciences Sep 2020The use of amide-based local anesthetics is generally considered to be safe. However, the literature on their safety in patients with hepatic injury is scarce. For the...
BACKGROUND
The use of amide-based local anesthetics is generally considered to be safe. However, the literature on their safety in patients with hepatic injury is scarce. For the first time, the present study aimed to evaluate the effect and safety of five commonly used amide-based local anesthetics in the setting of hepatic failure.
METHODS
A total of 96 Sprague-Dawley rats were studied from September 2015 to September 2016 in the Animal Laboratory Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. They divided into three groups, namely a control, induced liver failure (LF), and non-LF groups. The rats were administered local anesthetic agents (lidocaine, prilocaine with felypressin, lidocaine with epinephrine, mepivacaine, articaine, and prilocaine). The effect of these drugs was evaluated by comparing the liver enzyme levels of the rats. The data were analyzed using SPSS software. The independent test, one-way ANOVA, and the tests were used to compare groups. A P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
In non-LF rats, mepivacaine, lidocaine, and lidocaine with epinephrine caused a significant increase in aspartate aminotransferase (AST) level compared with the effect of prilocaine with felypressin and articaine. In non-LF rats, only mepivacaine resulted in a significant increase in AST level compared with lidocaine (P=0.007) and prilocaine with felypressin (P=0.044). In this group, only mepivacaine caused a significant increase in alanine transaminase (ALT) level compared with lidocaine (P=0.016). Whereas in the LF group, mepivacaine caused an increase in ALT level compared with the effect of both prilocaine with felypressin (P=0.009) and articaine (P<0.001). The use of mepivacaine in the LF group caused a significant increase in gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase level compared prilocaine with felypressin (P=0.039).
CONCLUSION
Articaine and prilocaine with felypressin local anesthetics induced the least change in hepatic enzyme levels in rats with abnormal hepatic function.
PubMed: 33060881
DOI: 10.30476/ijms.2020.72596.0 -
Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2017Topical anesthesia analgesic therapy has diverse applicability in solving the barrier properties of skin and unfavorable physicochemical properties of drugs. Lidocaine... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
Design and evaluation of lidocaine- and prilocaine-coloaded nanoparticulate drug delivery systems for topical anesthetic analgesic therapy: a comparison between solid lipid nanoparticles and nanostructured lipid carriers.
PURPOSE
Topical anesthesia analgesic therapy has diverse applicability in solving the barrier properties of skin and unfavorable physicochemical properties of drugs. Lidocaine (LID) combined with prilocaine (PRI) has been used as a topical preparation for dermal anesthesia for treatment of conditions such as paresthesia.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this study, for combination anesthesia and overcoming the drawbacks of LID and PRI, respectively, LID- and PRI-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs) and nanostructured lipid carriers (NLCs) were prepared and characterized by determination of their particle size, drug loading capacity, stability, in vitro drug release behavior and in vitro cellular viability. Ex vivo skin permeation and in vivo anesthesia analgesic efficiency of these two systems were also evaluated and compared.
RESULTS
Results revealed that combination delivery of the dual drugs exhibited more remarkable efficiency than signal drug-loaded systems. SLN systems have better ex vivo skin permeation ability than NLCs. NLC systems revealed a stronger in vivo anesthesia analgesic effect than SLN systems.
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that SLNs and NLCs have different advantages, and that both carriers are promising dual drug delivery systems for topical anesthetic analgesic therapy.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Anesthetics, Local; Animals; BALB 3T3 Cells; Chemistry, Pharmaceutical; Drug Carriers; Drug Delivery Systems; Drug Liberation; Lidocaine; Lipids; Mice; Nanoparticles; Particle Size; Prilocaine; Rats; Rats, Wistar; Skin; Skin Absorption
PubMed: 29075099
DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S141031 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2016Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) show that breastfeeding newborn infants during painful procedures reduces pain. Mechanisms are considered to be multifactorial and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) show that breastfeeding newborn infants during painful procedures reduces pain. Mechanisms are considered to be multifactorial and include sucking, skin-to-skin contact, warmth, rocking, sound and smell of the mother, and possibly endogenous opiates present in the breast milk.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of breastfeeding on procedural pain in infants beyond the neonatal period (first 28 days of life) up to one year of age compared to no intervention, placebo, parental holding, skin-to-skin contact, expressed breast milk, formula milk, bottle feeding, sweet-tasting solutions (e.g. sucrose or glucose), distraction, or other interventions.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases to 18 February 2016: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (OVID), Embase (OVID), PsycINFO (OVID), and CINAHL (EBSCO); the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT), ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) (apps.who.int/trialsearch/) for ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs and quasi-RCTs involving infants aged 28 days postnatal to 12 months and receiving breastfeeding while undergoing a painful procedure. Comparators included, but were not limited to, oral administration of water, sweet-tasting solutions, expressed breast or formula milk, no intervention, use of pacifiers, positioning, cuddling, distraction, topical anaesthetics, and skin-to-skin care. Procedures included, but were not limited to: subcutaneous or intramuscular injection, venipuncture, intravenous line insertion, heel lance, and finger lance. We applied no language restrictions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. The main outcome measures were behavioural or physiological indicators and composite pain scores, as well as other clinically important outcomes reported by the authors of included studies. We pooled data for the most comparable outcomes and where data from at least two studies could be included. We used mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI), employing a random-effects model for continuous outcomes measured on the same scales. For continuous outcomes measured on different scales, we pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and associated 95% CIs. For dichotomous outcomes, we planned to pool events between groups across studies using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs. However, as insufficient studies reported dichotomous outcomes, we did not pool such events. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 studies with a total of 1066 infants. All studies were conducted during early childhood immunisation. As the breastfeeding intervention cannot be blinded, we rated all studies as being at high risk of bias for blinding of participants and personnel. We assessed nine studies as being at low risk of bias for incomplete outcome data. In addition, we rated nine studies as high risk for blinding of outcome assessment. We scored risk of bias related to random sequence generation, allocation concealment, and selective reporting as unclear for the majority of the studies due to lack of information.Our primary outcome was pain. Breastfeeding reduced behavioural pain responses (cry time and pain scores) during vaccination compared to no treatment, oral water, and other interventions such as cuddling, oral glucose, topical anaesthetic, massage, and vapocoolant. Breastfeeding did not consistently reduce changes in physiological indicators, such as heart rate. We pooled data for duration of cry from six studies (n = 547 infants). Breastfeeding compared to water or no treatment resulted in a 38-second reduction in cry time (MD -38, 95% CI -50 to -26; P < 0.00001). The quality of the evidence according to GRADE for this outcome was moderate, as most infants were 6 months or younger, and outcomes may be different for infants during their 12-month immunisation. We pooled data for pain scores from five studies (n = 310 infants). Breastfeeding was associated with a 1.7-point reduction in standardised pain scores (SMD -1.7, 95% CI -2.2 to -1.3); we considered this evidence to be of moderate quality as data were primarily from infants younger than 6 months of age. We could pool heart rate data following injections for only two studies (n = 186); we considered this evidence to be of low quality due to insufficient data. There were no differences between breastfeeding and control (MD -3.6, -23 to 16).Four of the 10 studies had more than two study arms. Breastfeeding was more effective in reducing crying duration or pain scores during vaccination compared to: 25% dextrose and topical anaesthetic cream (EMLA), vapocoolant, maternal cuddling, and massage.No included studies reported adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We conclude, based on the 10 studies included in this review, that breastfeeding may help reduce pain during vaccination for infants beyond the neonatal period. Breastfeeding consistently reduced behavioural responses of cry duration and composite pain scores during and following vaccinations. However, there was no evidence that breastfeeding had an effect on physiological responses. No studies included in this review involved populations of hospitalised infants undergoing other skin-breaking procedures. Although it may be possible to extrapolate the review results to this population, further studies of efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability in this population are warranted.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Breast Feeding; Crying; Female; Glucose; Heart Rate; Humans; Infant; Infant Care; Lidocaine; Lidocaine, Prilocaine Drug Combination; Massage; Pain; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Prilocaine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Vaccination
PubMed: 27792244
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011248.pub2 -
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine Nov 1995
Topics: Analgesia; Anesthetics, Local; Drug Combinations; Humans; Lidocaine; Lidocaine, Prilocaine Drug Combination; Ointments; Phlebotomy; Prilocaine
PubMed: 8544157
DOI: No ID Found -
Dental Research Journal 2023This study aimed to compare the success rate of inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) anesthesia in the mandibular first molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis using two...
Comparison of the success of inferior alveolar nerve anesthesia in the mandibular first molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis using two anesthetic solutions of prilocaine and mepivacaine: A randomized controlled clinical trial.
BACKGROUND
This study aimed to compare the success rate of inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) anesthesia in the mandibular first molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis using two anesthetic solutions of prilocaine and mepivacaine.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The current randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 100 patients in two groups ( = 50). Standard injection of IAN block (IANB) was performed using two cartridges of 3% mepivacaine plain in the first group and using two cartridges of 3% prilocaine with 0.03 IU felypressin in the second group. Fifteen minutes after injection, the patients were asked about lip anesthesia. In case of a positive answer, the tooth was isolated with a rubber dam. Success was defined as no or mild pain on the basis of the visual analog scale recording upon access cavity preparation, entry into the pulp chamber, and initial instrumentation. Data were analyzed with SPSS 17 using the Chi-square test, and < 0.05 was set as statistically significant.
RESULTS
The patients' pain severities during the three stages were significantly different ( = 0.001, 0.0001, and 0.001, respectively). The success rate of IANB during access cavity preparation was 88% with prilocaine and 68% with mepivacaine. This rate during entry into the pulp chamber was 78% and 24%, respectively, which was 3.25 times higher with prilocaine than mepivacaine. The success rates during instrumentation were 32% and 10%, respectively, which was 3.2 times higher with prilocaine than mepivacaine.
CONCLUSION
The success rate of IANB in the teeth with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis was higher using 3% prilocaine with felypressin than using 3% mepivacaine.
PubMed: 37180689
DOI: No ID Found -
European Journal of Pharmaceutics and... May 2023It is generally recognized that water, acting as a plasticizer, increases molecular mobility, leading to a decrease of the glass transition temperature (T) in amorphous...
It is generally recognized that water, acting as a plasticizer, increases molecular mobility, leading to a decrease of the glass transition temperature (T) in amorphous systems. However, an anti-plasticizing effect of water was recently observed on prilocaine (PRL). This effect might be used in co-amorphous systems to moderate the plasticizing effect of water. Nicotinamide (NIC) can form co-amorphous systems with PRL. In order to investigate the effect of water on these co-amorphous systems, the Ts and molecular mobility of hydrated co-amorphous NIC-PRL systems were compared with those of the respective anhydrous systems. Molecular mobility was estimated by considering the enthalpic recovery at the T using the Kohlrausch-Williams-Watts (KWW) equation. At molar ratios of NIC above 0.2, a plasticizing effect of water on co-amorphous NIC-PRL systems was observed with increasing the NIC concentration. In contrast, at molar ratios of NIC of 0.2 and below, water had an anti-plasticizing effect on the co-amorphous NIC-PRL systems, with increased Ts and reduced mobility upon hydration.
Topics: Prilocaine; Calorimetry, Differential Scanning; Transition Temperature; Chemical Phenomena; Water
PubMed: 36878408
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpb.2023.02.015 -
International Journal of Pharmaceutics Mar 2020Local anaesthetics are administered as a diffuse superficial slow injection in blepharoplasty. Current transcutaneous local anaesthetic formulations are not licensed for...
Local anaesthetics are administered as a diffuse superficial slow injection in blepharoplasty. Current transcutaneous local anaesthetic formulations are not licensed for use on the face due to safety concerns. Here we report for the first time the permeation of local anaesthetics (lidocaine, bupivacaine loaded SNEDDS and their hydrogels) across human eyelid and mouse skin as a novel and ocular safe formulation for eyelid surgery. SNEDDS were loaded with high levels of anaesthetics and incorporated within carbomer hydrogels to yield nano-enabled gels. Lidocaine hydrogels have a significantly reduced lag time compared to EMLA, while they enhance lidocaine flux across human eyelid skin by 5.2 fold. Ex vivo tape stripping experiments indicated localisation of anaesthetics within the stratum corneum and dermis. Initial histopathological studies have shown no apparent signs of skin irritation. These results highlight the potential clinical capability of nano-enabled anaesthetic hydrogels as a non-invasive anaesthetic procedure for eyelid surgery.
Topics: Acrylic Resins; Administration, Cutaneous; Anesthetics, Local; Animals; Bupivacaine; Drug Delivery Systems; Emulsions; Eyelids; Humans; Hydrogels; Lidocaine; Lidocaine, Prilocaine Drug Combination; Male; Mice; Nanogels; Nanotechnology; Ophthalmologic Surgical Procedures; Skin Absorption
PubMed: 31935474
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2019.119003 -
Canadian Family Physician Medecin de... Mar 2019As a family physician who works in the local community emergency department, my skills include performing lumbar puncture in young children and infants. I hear...
As a family physician who works in the local community emergency department, my skills include performing lumbar puncture in young children and infants. I hear conflicting recommendations in regard to provision of analgesia during lumbar puncture in these patients. Does local analgesia affect the success rate of the procedure? What is the best practice for analgesia in young children and infants? Lumbar puncture is one of the most commonly encountered painful procedures in pediatric medicine; it is imperative for timely diagnosis of central nervous system infections in febrile young infants. For many years it has been documented that health care providers provide suboptimal analgesia, despite the understanding that this is a painful procedure for infants and children of all ages. Using a lidocaine and prilocaine combination or a 1% lidocaine infiltration (or both) is recommended and has been associated with improved outcomes during the procedure.
Topics: Adolescent; Analgesia; Anesthetics, Local; Child; Child, Preschool; Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Infant; Lidocaine; Lidocaine, Prilocaine Drug Combination; Pain; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Spinal Puncture
PubMed: 30867175
DOI: No ID Found -
Advances in Therapy Jan 2020Available short-acting intrathecal anesthetic agents (chloroprocaine and prilocaine) offer an alternative to general anesthesia for short-duration surgical procedures,... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial Observational Study
INTRODUCTION
Available short-acting intrathecal anesthetic agents (chloroprocaine and prilocaine) offer an alternative to general anesthesia for short-duration surgical procedures, especially ambulatory surgeries. Factors determining the choice of anesthesia for short-duration procedures have not been previously identified.
METHODS
This observational, prospective, multicenter, cohort study was conducted between July 2015 and July 2016, in 33 private or public hospitals performing ambulatory surgery. The primary objective was to determine the factors influencing the choice of anesthetic technique (spinal or general anesthesia). Secondary outcomes included efficacy of the anesthesia, time to hospital discharge, and patient satisfaction.
RESULTS
Among 592 patients enrolled, 309 received spinal anesthesia and 283 underwent general anesthesia. In both study arms, the most frequently performed surgical procedures were orthopedic and urologic (43.3% and 30.7%, respectively); 66.1% of patients were free to choose their type of anesthesia, 21.8% chose one of the techniques because they were afraid of the other, 16.8% based their choice on the expected ease of recovery, 19.2% considered their degree of anxiety/stress, and 16.9% chose the technique on the basis of its efficacy. The median times to micturition and to unassisted ambulation were significantly shorter in the general anesthesia arm compared with the spinal anesthesia arm (225.5 [98; 560] min vs. 259.0 [109; 789] min; p = 0.0011 and 215.0 [30; 545] min vs. 240.0 [40; 1420]; p = 0.0115, respectively). The median time to hospital discharge was equivalent in both study arms. In the spinal anesthesia arm, patients who received chloroprocaine and prilocaine recovered faster than patients who received bupivacaine. The time to ambulation and the time to hospital discharge were shorter (p < 0.001). The overall success rate of spinal anesthesia was 91.6%, and no significant difference was observed between chloroprocaine, prilocaine, and bupivacaine. The patients' global satisfaction with anesthesia and surgery was over 90% in both study arms.
CONCLUSIONS
Patient's choice, patient fear of the alternative technique, patient stress/anxiety, the expected ease of recovery, and the efficacy of the technique were identified as the main factors influencing patient choice of short-acting local anesthesia or general anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia with short-acting local anesthetics was preferred to general anesthesia in ambulatory surgeries and was associated with a high degree of patient satisfaction.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02529501. Registered on June 23, 2015. Date of enrollment of the first participant July 21, 2015.
Topics: Adult; Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; Anesthesia, General; Anesthesia, Spinal; Anesthetics, Local; Bupivacaine; Cohort Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Satisfaction; Procaine; Prospective Studies; Time Factors
PubMed: 31828612
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-019-01171-6 -
Anaesthesia Feb 1984Six volunteers underwent intravenous regional anaesthesia of the non-dominant arm on four occasions using two equipotent doses of bupivacaine and prilocaine,... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Six volunteers underwent intravenous regional anaesthesia of the non-dominant arm on four occasions using two equipotent doses of bupivacaine and prilocaine, administered in a randomised double-blind sequence. Equipotent doses produced similar degrees of motor and sensory blockade. Bupivacaine produced more rapid motor power loss and delayed motor recovery (p less than 0.01). Prilocaine produced more prolonged objective blockade following tourniquet release (p less than 0.01), although this was not clinically useful, and bupivacaine led to a marked prolongation of subjective blockade (p less than 0.01). Increase of dose with both drugs gave more rapid and complete sensory and motor blockade and delayed recovery (p less than 0.05). This was, however, associated with more marked toxicity. It is suggested that in intravenous regional anaesthesia there are no clinical differences between the drugs in equipotent solutions, and that the lower concentrations are the appropriate ones for standard use.
Topics: Adult; Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, Intravenous; Bupivacaine; Forearm; Humans; Male; Nerve Block; Prilocaine; Therapeutic Equivalency; Time Factors; Tourniquets
PubMed: 6703268
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1984.tb09504.x