Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery

<p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligib...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Gupta Shailesh K [verfasserIn] Agarwal Swati [verfasserIn] Murthy Ravi K [verfasserIn] Chalam KV [verfasserIn] Grover Sandeep [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2009

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: BMC Ophthalmology - BMC, 2003, 9(2009), 1, p 7
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:9 ; year:2009 ; number:1, p 7

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1186/1471-2415-9-7

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ037454455

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ037454455
003	DE-627
005	20230308010504.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230227s2009 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ037454455
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a RE1-994
100	0		\|a Gupta Shailesh K \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery
264		1	\|c 2009
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p<
653		0	\|a Ophthalmology
700	0		\|a Agarwal Swati \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Murthy Ravi K \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Chalam KV \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Grover Sandeep \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t BMC Ophthalmology \|d BMC, 2003 \|g 9(2009), 1, p 7 \|w (DE-627)331018772 \|w (DE-600)2050436-6 \|x 14712415 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:9 \|g year:2009 \|g number:1, p 7
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 9 \|j 2009 \|e 1, p 7

Indexfelder

author_variant	g s k gsk a s as m r k mrk c k ck g s gs
matchkey_str	article:14712415:2009----::oprtvefccotpclervsvruldciee
hierarchy_sort_str	2009
callnumber-subject-code	RE
publishDate	2009
allfields	10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 doi (DE-627)DOAJ037454455 (DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RE1-994 Gupta Shailesh K verfasserin aut Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p< Ophthalmology Agarwal Swati verfasserin aut Murthy Ravi K verfasserin aut Chalam KV verfasserin aut Grover Sandeep verfasserin aut In BMC Ophthalmology BMC, 2003 9(2009), 1, p 7 (DE-627)331018772 (DE-600)2050436-6 14712415 nnns volume:9 year:2009 number:1, p 7 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 kostenfrei http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2009 1, p 7
spelling	10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 doi (DE-627)DOAJ037454455 (DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RE1-994 Gupta Shailesh K verfasserin aut Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p< Ophthalmology Agarwal Swati verfasserin aut Murthy Ravi K verfasserin aut Chalam KV verfasserin aut Grover Sandeep verfasserin aut In BMC Ophthalmology BMC, 2003 9(2009), 1, p 7 (DE-627)331018772 (DE-600)2050436-6 14712415 nnns volume:9 year:2009 number:1, p 7 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 kostenfrei http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2009 1, p 7
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 doi (DE-627)DOAJ037454455 (DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RE1-994 Gupta Shailesh K verfasserin aut Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p< Ophthalmology Agarwal Swati verfasserin aut Murthy Ravi K verfasserin aut Chalam KV verfasserin aut Grover Sandeep verfasserin aut In BMC Ophthalmology BMC, 2003 9(2009), 1, p 7 (DE-627)331018772 (DE-600)2050436-6 14712415 nnns volume:9 year:2009 number:1, p 7 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 kostenfrei http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2009 1, p 7
allfieldsGer	10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 doi (DE-627)DOAJ037454455 (DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RE1-994 Gupta Shailesh K verfasserin aut Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p< Ophthalmology Agarwal Swati verfasserin aut Murthy Ravi K verfasserin aut Chalam KV verfasserin aut Grover Sandeep verfasserin aut In BMC Ophthalmology BMC, 2003 9(2009), 1, p 7 (DE-627)331018772 (DE-600)2050436-6 14712415 nnns volume:9 year:2009 number:1, p 7 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 kostenfrei http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2009 1, p 7
allfieldsSound	10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 doi (DE-627)DOAJ037454455 (DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RE1-994 Gupta Shailesh K verfasserin aut Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p< Ophthalmology Agarwal Swati verfasserin aut Murthy Ravi K verfasserin aut Chalam KV verfasserin aut Grover Sandeep verfasserin aut In BMC Ophthalmology BMC, 2003 9(2009), 1, p 7 (DE-627)331018772 (DE-600)2050436-6 14712415 nnns volume:9 year:2009 number:1, p 7 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 kostenfrei http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2009 1, p 7
language	English
source	In BMC Ophthalmology 9(2009), 1, p 7 volume:9 year:2009 number:1, p 7
sourceStr	In BMC Ophthalmology 9(2009), 1, p 7 volume:9 year:2009 number:1, p 7
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Ophthalmology
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	BMC Ophthalmology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Gupta Shailesh K @@aut@@ Agarwal Swati @@aut@@ Murthy Ravi K @@aut@@ Chalam KV @@aut@@ Grover Sandeep @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2009-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	331018772
id	DOAJ037454455
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ037454455</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308010504.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2009 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1471-2415-9-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ037454455</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RE1-994</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gupta Shailesh K</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a"><p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p<</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Ophthalmology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Agarwal Swati</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Murthy Ravi K</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chalam KV</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grover Sandeep</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC Ophthalmology</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2003</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2009), 1, p 7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018772</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050436-6</subfield><subfield code="x">14712415</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2009</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1, p 7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2009</subfield><subfield code="e">1, p 7</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Gupta Shailesh K
spellingShingle	Gupta Shailesh K misc RE1-994 misc Ophthalmology Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery
authorStr	Gupta Shailesh K
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)331018772
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RE1-994
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	14712415
topic_title	RE1-994 Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery
topic	misc RE1-994 misc Ophthalmology
topic_unstemmed	misc RE1-994 misc Ophthalmology
topic_browse	misc RE1-994 misc Ophthalmology
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	BMC Ophthalmology
hierarchy_parent_id	331018772
hierarchy_top_title	BMC Ophthalmology
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)331018772 (DE-600)2050436-6
title	Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ037454455 (DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807
title_full	Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery
author_sort	Gupta Shailesh K
journal	BMC Ophthalmology
journalStr	BMC Ophthalmology
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2009
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Gupta Shailesh K Agarwal Swati Murthy Ravi K Chalam KV Grover Sandeep
container_volume	9
class	RE1-994
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Gupta Shailesh K
doi_str_mv	10.1186/1471-2415-9-7
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	comparative efficacy of topical tetravisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery
callnumber	RE1-994
title_auth	Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery
abstract	<p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p<
abstractGer	<p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p<
abstract_unstemmed	<p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p<
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1, p 7
title_short	Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery
url	https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7 https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7 https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415
remote_bool	true
author2	Agarwal Swati Murthy Ravi K Chalam KV Grover Sandeep
author2Str	Agarwal Swati Murthy Ravi K Chalam KV Grover Sandeep
ppnlink	331018772
callnumber-subject	RE - Ophthalmology
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/1471-2415-9-7
callnumber-a	RE1-994
up_date	2024-07-04T01:16:43.558Z
_version_	1803609234278973440
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ037454455</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308010504.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2009 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1471-2415-9-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ037454455</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJe0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RE1-994</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gupta Shailesh K</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a"><p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<To compare the clinical efficacy of lidocaine 2% with tetracaine 0.5% for cataract surgery.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<In a randomized, multi-surgeon, controlled clinical trial,122 consecutive cataract cases eligible for topical anesthesia, were randomly assigned to receive lidocaine 2% gel (1 ml) or tetracaine solution 0.5% (TetraVisc, 0.5 ml) before clear corneal phacoemulsification. Main outcome measure was visual analog scale (0 to 10), which was used to measure intra-operative pain. Secondary outcome measures included patients' discomfort due to tissue manipulation and surgeon graded patients' cooperation. Duration of surgery and intra-operative complications were also recorded.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<The mean age in TetraVisc (TV) group was 70.4 years and in the lidocaine gel group (LG) it was 70.6 years (p = 0.89). Patient reported mean intra-operative pain scores by visual analog scale were 0.70 ± 0.31 in TV group and 1.8 ± 0.4 in LG group (<it<P </it<< 0.001). Mean patient cooperation was also marginally better in the TV group (8.3 ± 0.3) compared to LG group (8.4 ± 0.6) (P = 0.25). 96% of patients in TV group showed intra-operative corneal clarity compared to 91% in LG group. TV group had less (1 out of 61 patients, 1.6%) intra-operative complications than LG group (3 out of 61 patients, 4.8%). No anesthesia related complications were noted in either group</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<Topical TetraVisc solution was superior to lidocaine 2% gel for pain control in patients undergoing clear corneal phacoemulsification. Lidocaine 2% gel is similar to TetraVisc in patient comfort and surgeon satisfaction.</p< <p<Trial Registration</p< <p<<b<Clinical trials number</b<: ISRCTN78374774</p<</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Ophthalmology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Agarwal Swati</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Murthy Ravi K</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chalam KV</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grover Sandeep</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC Ophthalmology</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2003</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2009), 1, p 7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018772</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050436-6</subfield><subfield code="x">14712415</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2009</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1, p 7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-9-7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/e0edbb486b7e453e8e6c1d8007bd6807</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2415/9/7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2415</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2009</subfield><subfield code="e">1, p 7</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3992653

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Comparative efficacy of topical tetraVisc versus lidocaine gel in cataract surgery

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?