Proparacaine Overuse in Corneal Abrasions at the Emergency Department: A Case Series.

ABSTRACT: Corneal abrasions are among the most common ophthalmic injuries in the emergency department (ED) and primarily present as severe ocular pain. Topical anesthetics provide temporary analgesia, but overuse is associated with complications including further corneal injury, infection, and vision loss. This case series describes three patients who used a 15-mL bottle of 0.05% proparacaine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution after discharge from the ED and returned within three days with corneal injury and pain. Although the use of topical anesthetics is traditionally discouraged by ophthalmologists, publications in the emergency medicine literature support their use. We review the literature surrounding topical anesthetic use in the ED setting and caution against prescribing patients topical anesthetics for corneal abrasions, particularly without patient counseling and significant restriction of anesthetic supply.

New application of an old drug proparacaine in treating epilepsy via liposomal hydrogel formulation.

Proparacaine (PPC) is a previously discovered topical anesthetic for ophthalmic optometry and surgery by blocking the central Nav1.3. In this study, we found that proparacaine hydrochloride (PPC-HCl) exerted an acute robust antiepileptic effect in pilocarpine-induced epilepsy mice. More importantly, chronic treatment with PPC-HCl totally terminated spontaneous recurrent seizure occurrence without significant toxicity. Chronic treatment with PPC-HCl did not cause obvious cytotoxicity, neuropsychiatric adverse effects, hepatotoxicity, cardiotoxicity, and even genotoxicity that evaluated by whole genome-scale transcriptomic analyses. Only when in a high dose (50 mg/kg), the QRS interval measured by electrocardiography was slightly prolonged, which was similar to the impact of levetiracetam. Nevertheless, to overcome this potential issue, we adopt a liposome encapsulation strategy that could alleviate cardiotoxicity and prepared a type of hydrogel containing PPC-HCl for sustained release. Implantation of thermosensitive chitosan-based hydrogel containing liposomal PPC-HCl into the subcutaneous tissue exerted immediate and long-lasting remission from spontaneous recurrent seizure in epileptic mice without affecting QRS interval. Therefore, this new liposomal hydrogel formulation of proparacaine could be developed as a transdermal patch for treating epilepsy, avoiding the severe toxicity after chronic treatment with current antiepileptic drugs in clinic.

REPLACEMENT OF LIDOCAINE GEL WITH TOPICAL PROPARACAINE ANESTHESIA FOR ROUTINE INTRAVITREAL INJECTIONS: A Comparative Study.

PURPOSE: Lidocaine gel was suggested to be highly effective in providing anesthesia for intravitreal injections but adverse effects include a possibility of making sterilization of the conjunctiva difficult. Hence, we wished to determine the effect of using 0.5% proparacaine drops alone over the use of 3.5% lidocaine hydrochloride gel anesthesia during office-based intravitreal injections. METHODOLOGY: This was a case-control study in patients who came routinely to the clinic for antivascular endothelial growth factor injections. Eyes were treated with one of two anesthesia modalities. A total of 216 injections in 120 patients were reviewed. One group (N = 107) underwent anesthesia with 0.5% proparacaine drops, and the control group (N = 109) received 3.5% lidocaine gel. The pain perceived after injection was graded using the numerical rating scale, and score was immediately recorded by the "masked" injecting physician. RESULTS: The mean pain score (±SD) for the proparacaine-only group versus gel group was 1.97 (±1.17) versus 1.76 (±0.92), P value = 0.3174. There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: 3.5% lidocaine gel is not superior to 0.5% proparacaine drops as patients attained good pain control and excellent rates of overall satisfaction with proparacaine drops alone.

Postoperative Corneal Injuries: Incidence and Risk Factors.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies of postoperative corneal injury rates relied on provider-initiated incident reports, which may underestimate the true incidence. Postoperative administration of proparacaine eye drops is used almost exclusively to diagnose corneal injury; therefore, identifying instances of administration may provide a better estimate of corneal injuries. We compared proparacaine administration versus provider-initiated reports to determine rates of corneal injury. In addition, potential associations between clinical variables and injury were assessed with a matched case-control study. METHODS: The health records of 132,511 sequential adult postanesthesia recovery room admissions (January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2017) were reviewed to identify postoperative proparacaine administration and incident reports of corneal injury. Patients with corneal injury were matched with control patients at a 1:2 ratio to assess factors associated with injury. RESULTS: Proparacaine drops were administered to 442 patients (425 patients received proparacaine for diagnosis and 17 patients received proparacaine for unrelated reasons). Incident reports identified 320 injuries, and the aggregate corneal injury count was 436 (incidence, 3.3 injuries [95% confidence interval {CI}, 3.0-3.6] per 1000 cases of general anesthesia). Proparacaine administration had a greater case ascertainment percentage than incident reporting (97.5% vs 73.4%; P < .001). The matched case-control analysis found greater risks associated with longer duration of anesthesia (odds ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.03-1.07] per 10 minutes of anesthesia; P < .001) and nonsupine surgical position (odds ratio, 3.89 [95% CI, 2.17-6.98]; P < .001). Patients with injuries also had more evidence of sedation and agitation during anesthesia recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Calculation of incidence by using the administration of a medication (proparacaine eye drops) that is almost exclusively used to diagnose a specific injury (corneal injury) showed higher case ascertainment percentage than incident-reporting methods. Similar strategies could be used to monitor the rates of other adverse events.

Effect of four local anesthetics (tetracaine, proparacaine, lidocaine, and bupivacaine) on intraocular pressure in dogs.

PURPOSE: To measure IOP in animals, it is often necessary to use topical anesthetics. The use of these drugs may cause changes in IOP and interfere with the final results. To address this issue, the effects of four local anesthetics (tetracaine, proparacaine, lidocaine, and bupivacaine) on IOP were investigated in ten adult dogs. METHODS: One drop of tetracaine was instilled in the right eye of half of the dogs and in the left eye of the other dogs; normal saline was instilled in the fellow eyes. The IOP in each dog was measured before and at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, and 35 min after drug instillation using an electronic rebound tonometer. The effects of the other anesthetics were studied in the same way at intervals of at least 1 week. RESULTS: After instillation of tetracaine, the IOP decreased gradually, such that after 15 min, the IOP was significantly lower than the baseline (p = 0.022) and control values (p = 0.048). Proparacaine also reduced IOP after 10 min compared to baseline values (p = 0.046), but the two other drugs, bupivacaine and lidocaine, had no significant effect on IOP. The duration of eye anesthesia was 16, 20, 22, and 34 min for tetracaine, lidocaine, bupivacaine, and proparacaine, respectively. CONCLUSION: We recommend using drugs that combine inducing longer anesthesia with producing the smallest change in IOP, such as bupivacaine and, subsequently, lidocaine. Tetracaine and proparacaine have a significant effect on IOP, and if these drugs are used, this effect should be considered.

Adding Dopamine to Proxymetacaine or Oxybuprocaine Solutions Potentiates and Prolongs the Cutaneous Antinociception in Rats.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the interaction of dopamine-proxymetacaine and dopamine- oxybuprocaine antinociception using isobolograms. METHODS: This experiment uses subcutaneous drug (proxymetacaine, oxybuprocaine, and dopamine) injections under the skin of the rat's back, thus simulating infiltration blocks. The dose-related antinociceptive curves of proxymetacaine and oxybuprocaine alone and in combination with dopamine were constructed, and then the antinociceptive interactions between the local anesthetic and dopamine were analyzed using isobolograms. RESULTS: Subcutaneous proxymetacaine, oxybuprocaine, and dopamine produced a sensory block to local skin pinpricks in a dose-dependent fashion. The rank order of potency was proxymetacaine (0.57 [0.52-0.63] µmol/kg) > oxybuprocaine (1.05 [0.96-1.15] µmol/kg) > dopamine (165 [154-177] µmol/kg; P < .01 for each comparison) based on the 50% effective dose values. On the equianesthetic basis (25% effective dose, 50% effective dose, and 75% effective dose), the nociceptive block duration of proxymetacaine or oxybuprocaine was shorter than that of dopamine (P < .01). Oxybuprocaine or proxymetacaine coinjected with dopamine elicited a synergistic antinociceptive effect and extended the duration of action. CONCLUSIONS: Oxybuprocaine and proxymetacaine had a higher potency and provoked a shorter duration of sensory block compared with dopamine. The use of dopamine increased the quality and duration of skin antinociception caused by oxybuprocaine and proxymetacaine.

Shelf Life and Efficacy of Diagnostic Eye Drops.

SIGNIFICANCE: Pharmaceutical companies recommend discarding ophthalmic drugs 28 days after opening. This study shows that diagnostic eye drops have a low risk of contamination over a 7-month period in a controlled clinical setup. The diagnostic efficiency seems to be preserved over this period. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the preservation period and the efficacy of ophthalmic preparations, such as 0.5% proparacaine hydrochloride, 1% tropicamide, 2.5% phenylephrine hydrochloride, and 1% cyclopentolate hydrochloride ophthalmic solution in a clinical and controlled setting. METHODS: Thirty-eight primary eye care students were recruited to participate in the study. They used 25 bottles of each diagnostic drop at the Clinique Universitaire de la Vision for a 7-month period. An analysis of the bacterial contamination was repeated 10 times using both an agar plate and a nutrient broth at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks and at 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 months. The anesthetic, mydriatic, and cycloplegic effects were tested after 7 months of use and compared with nonopened ophthalmic bottles. RESULTS: During the 7-month period, 4971 drops of proparacaine, 3219 drops of tropicamide and phenylephrine, and 1896 drops of cyclopentolate were administered to the patients. A total of 226 contacts between bottles and biological tissues were reported. After the 10 inoculation sessions on the agar medium at the predetermined times, no bacterial and fungal contamination was noted. No patient reported eye infections for 2 weeks after the drop instillation. Moreover, there was no difference in the efficacy when compared with new drops. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of the current study, diagnostic eye drops can be used with a low contamination risk beyond the recommendation date of 28 days up to 7 months, with the same efficacy, in a controlled clinical context.

Comparison of surgeon comfort assessment during phacoemulsification using bilateral topical anesthesia versus ipsilateral topical anesthesia: a randomized controlled study.

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of bilateral use of topical anesthetic eye drops during phacoemulsification procedure as compared to use in one eye only. METHODS: This is a prospective double-blind randomized case study of 180 cases undergoing phacoemulsification under topical anesthesia using 0.5% proparacaine: Group 1 consisting of patients who had topical anesthetic eye drop instilled into the operating eye only and Group 2 consisting of patients who had both their eyes anesthetized using topical anesthetic eye drops. Phacoemulsification was done using standard surgical technique. Main parameters evaluated included number of intra-operative patient counseling score (IPCS), surgical comfort score (SCS), total phacoemulsification procedure time (TPPT) and total operation time (TOPT). RESULTS: A comparison of mean value of various variables between Group 1 (60; 33.3% cases) and Group 2 (120; 66.7% cases) using "t" test revealed that there was a statistically significant difference for mean SCS (78.38 ± 10.31 vs. 85.05 ± 8.70; p = 0.00), mean IPCS (12.60 ± 3.11 vs. 6.63 ± 1.74; p = 0.00) and mean TOPT (418.88 ± 89.59 vs. 341.64 ± 79.51; p = 0.00), respectively. However, no statistically significant difference existed for mean TPPT (143.57 ± 87.96 vs. 152.96 ± 78.99; p = 0.48). CONCLUSION: Simultaneous instillation of topical anesthetic eye drops in both the eyes, i.e., operating eye and the fellow eye as against practice of instilling topical anesthetic eye drop in the operating eye only, helps in decreasing the total surgical time by primarily shortening the durations of pre- and post-ultrasonic periods of surgery where effective globe stabilization is wanted. This is achieved by better patient compliance, which in turn enhances surgeon's comfort during phacoemulsification surgery.

Corneal anesthetic effect and ocular tolerance of 3.5% lidocaine gel in comparison with 0.5% aqueous proparacaine and 0.5% viscous tetracaine in normal canines.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the degree and duration of corneal anesthesia of a novel viscous ophthalmic lidocaine hydrochloride preparation vs. two commonly used ophthalmic anesthetic preparations. METHODS: Each subject was randomly selected to receive 2 of 4 treatments at 2 different time periods separated by a 1 week washout: 3.5% lidocaine hydrochloride gel (Akten® ; Akorn Inc., Lake Forest, Illinois, USA), 0.5% aqueous proparacaine hydrochloride (Akorn Inc.), 0.5% viscous tetracaine hydrochloride (TetraVisc™; Ocusoft Inc., Richmond, Texas, USA), or 0.9% saline eyewash as a negative control. Corneal sensitivity was determined using a Cochet-Bonnet aesthesiometer (Luneau® , Chartres Cedex, France) prior to instillation of each treatment; at 1 and 5 min post treatment; and at 5-min intervals thereafter for 90 min total. Ocular side effects were recorded on a scale of 0-3. RESULTS: Twenty-four normal dogs (48 eyes) were entered into the study. Mean duration of maximal anesthesia was significantly greater at 34.2 min with tetracaine compared to 21.5 min and 19 min with proparacaine and lidocaine respectively. Corneal sensitivity was significantly decreased from baseline for up to 70 min with tetracaine and 55 min with both proparacaine and lidocaine. All lidocaine-treated eyes had transient blepharospasm and conjunctival hyperemia. Ten out of 24 tetracaine-treated eyes had conjunctival hyperemia with 4 of these having concurrent chemosis. CONCLUSIONS: Tetracaine provided a significantly longer duration of corneal anesthesia than proparacaine or lidocaine. Tetracaine and lidocaine were associated with more ocular side effects than proparacaine, although these were mild and transient. None.

Topical anesthesia or oral dextrose for the relief of pain in screening for retinopathy of prematurity: a randomized controlled double-blinded trial.

OBJECTIVE: Compare efficacy of 0.5% proparacaine eye drops and oral 25% dextrose in reducing pain during screening for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Twenty eligible babies were randomized. Group I received 0.5% proparacaine eye drops at first ROP screening, while Group II received 25% dextrose orally. At second examination, babies received no intervention. Pain was assessed using Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) score. RESULTS: The mean ( ± SD) PIPP during procedure in Group I were 15.5 ± 2.06 and 14 ± 2.4 at first and second screening (p = 0.259). The mean ( ± SD) PIPP in Group II were 14.2 ± 1. 8 and 14.9 ± 2.5 at the first and second screening (p = 0.428). Differences were not statistically significant. The PIPP scores of Group I and Group II at the first screening were also not significantly different (p = 0.165). CONCLUSION: ROP screening causes moderate to severe pain and neither proparacaine nor dextrose is an effective analgesic.

Efficacy of expressed breast milk in reducing pain during ROP screening--a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of expressed breast milk (EBM) on neonatal pain during screening for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). METHODS: Neonates who were on oral feeds undergoing ROP screening were included. Babies were randomized into intervention group (EBM + Standard practice) and control group. The standard practice is proparacaine, nesting and swaddling. Pain was assessed by PIPP scale, during and at 1 and 5 min after the procedure by the principal investigator who was blinded. RESULTS: The groups were similar in baseline characteristics. The group receiving EBM had significantly lower PIPP scores during the procedure 12.7 ± 1.69 compared to the control group 15.5 ± 1.78 (p < 0.05). The beneficial effect persisted at 1 min and 5 min after the procedure 6.20 ± 1.9 vs. 12.4 ± 2.54 (p ≤ 0.05) at 1 min; 3.2 ± 1.5 and 6.85 ± 2.4 (p < 0.05) at 5 min. CONCLUSION: Oral EBM significantly reduces pain during and after ROP screening.

AG-920 (Articaine) Ophthalmic Solution: A Masked, Active-Controlled Evaluation of Its Local Anesthetic Efficacy and Safety in Pediatric Patients.

Purpose: The safety and efficacy of a novel topical ocular anesthetic (AG-920 sterile ophthalmic solution, 8%) was previously evaluated in adults. For both clinical and regulatory purposes, this new agent was evaluated in children. Methods: This was a Phase 3, randomized, active-controlled, single-masked, parallel-group design study in healthy pediatric subjects performed at a private practice retina clinic in the United States. The safety and anesthetic efficacy of AG-920 was compared with proparacaine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.5% in 60 children undergoing ophthalmic examinations. The primary efficacy endpoint was whether the investigator was able to perform the eye examination. Results: In all subjects in each treatment group, the investigator was able to perform the eye examination without additional local anesthetic. There were no adverse events reported in this study. In both the study eye and fellow eye, there were no notable changes after dosing, and both treatment groups were similar. All external eye exams in all subjects in both treatment groups were normal. Conclusions: In this pediatric population aged 7 months to >11 years, AG-920 was therapeutically equivalent to marketed proparacaine with respect to having an ophthalmic examination performed without needing additional local anesthetic. Further, AG-920 was well tolerated, and there were no clinically significant safety findings.

Comparison of Proparacaine, Tetracaine, and Oxybuprocaine in Corneal Sensitivity Measurement.

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the onset and duration of action of 3 commercially available topical anesthetic solutions in Brazil, using the Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometer (Luneau®, Paris, France) and to quantitatively assess patient-reported discomfort during application. Methods: A prospective, randomized, masked, and double-blind study was conducted, involving 40 eyes from 21 patients. Patients were administered each one of the topical anesthetics weekly, and corneal sensitivity was measured using the Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometer's corneal touch threshold (CTT). Patients rated the burning sensation using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Results: Among the 21 patients (42.9% male), with a mean age of 31.95 years (±standard deviation = 10.17, range = 22.0-58.0), corneal sensitivity significantly decreased 30 s after application, returning to baseline after 30 min for all groups (P < 0.0001). Significant differences in CTT were observed at 5 min, with proparacaine exhibiting a superior anesthetic effect (P = 0.0003), at 10 min, where tetracaine displayed the most substantial anesthetic effect (P = 0.0135), and at 20 min, where tetracaine demonstrated the highest anesthetic efficacy (P < 0.0001). VAS scores indicated the most intense burning sensation with tetracaine (P < 0.0001). Men reported experiencing more discomfort during instillation compared with women (P = 0.0168). Conclusions: Proparacaine exhibited the fastest onset of action among the 3 topical anesthetics and provided a more comfortable eye sensation during instillation. However, tetracaine demonstrated the longest duration of action despite causing more discomfort.

A randomised comparison of lidocaine 2% gel and proparacaine 0.5% eye drops in paediatric squint surgery.

We conducted a randomised trial comparing lidocaine 2% gel with proparacaine 0.5% eye drops in children having elective squint surgery. One hundred and forty children aged between 3 and 14 years were recruited. The requirement for intra-operative fentanyl and postoperative ibuprofen was significantly less in the lidocaine group compared with the proparacaine group (1 (1.7%) vs 12 (18.5%), p=0.002 and 16 (27.6%) 38 (58.5%), p=0.001, respectively). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was significantly less in the lidocaine group compared with the proparacaine group (6 (10.3%) vs 16 (24.6%), p=0.04). There were no differences between the groups in terms of incidence and severity of the oculocardiac reflex. We conclude that, compared with proparacaine 0.5% eye drops, a single application of lidocaine 2% gel improves peri-operative analgesia and reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in elective paediatric squint surgery.

Early amniotic membrane transplantation for toxic keratopathy secondary to topical proparacaine abuse: a report of seven cases.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of early amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT) in patients with topical proparacaine-related toxic keratopathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2008 and 2011, eight eyes of seven patients with toxic keratopathy related to 0.5% proparacaine abuse underwent early AMT (within 1 to 5 days following the diagnosis). Clinical findings and treatment outcomes of these cases were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: The median time of topical anesthetic abuse until admission to our clinic was 28 (10-112) days. One case was referred due to achanthamoeba keratitis; two cases due to intractable corneal ulcer and melting. At initial examination, visual acuities varied between hand motions and 0.4 (in decimal notation). Biomicroscopic evaluation at presentation revealed epithelial defects, corneal ulcers, stromal ring infiltrate, stromal edema and corneal melting with varying degrees. At third month after AMT, the visual acuities varied between hand motions and 0.9, and all the patients had corneal stromal opacities with varying densities. One patient, who did not respond to medical and surgical treatment and developed secondary infections that invaded intraocular structures, underwent evisceration. CONCLUSION: Topical anesthetic abuse can lead to serious ocular complications. After proper diagnosis, the first step of treatment is the cessation of drug abuse. In addition to medical treatment, early AMT has an advantage of early pain relief and consequential elimination of the need for topical anesthetic instillation.

Comparison of cycloplegia at 20- and 30-minutes following proxymetacaine and cyclopentolate instillation in white 12-13-year-olds.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Reducing the time between drop instillation and refraction reduces the time paediatric patients and young adults spend in practice, facilitating more eye examinations daily. BACKGROUND: The current procedure for paediatric cycloplegic refraction is to wait for at least 30-minutes post-instillation of a cycloplegic before measuring spherical equivalent refraction. This study compared cycloplegia at 20- and 30-minutes following 0.5% proxymetacaine and 1.0% cyclopentolate in 12-13-year-olds. METHODS: Participants were 99 white 12-13-year-olds. One drop of proxymetacaine hydrochloride (Minims, 0.5% w/v, Bausch & Lomb, UK) followed by one drop of cyclopentolate hydrochloride (Minims, 1.0% w/v, Bausch & Lomb, UK) was instilled into both eyes. Spherical equivalent refraction was measured by autorefraction (Dong Yang Rekto ORK-11 Auto Ref-Keratometer) at 20- and 30-minutes post-instillation. Data were analysed through paired t-testing, correlations, and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in level of cycloplegia achieved at 20- (Mean spherical equivalent refraction (standard deviation) 0.438 (1.404) D) and 30-minutes (0.487 (1.420) D) post-eyedrop instillation (t (98) = 1.667, p = 0.099). The mean spherical equivalent refraction difference between time points was small (0.049 (0.294) D, 95% confidence interval =-0.108 ̶ 0.009D). Agreement indices: Accuracy = 0.999, Precision = 0.973, Concordance = 0.972. Spherical equivalent refraction at 20- and 30-minutes differed by ≤0.50D in 92% of eyes, and by <1.00D in 95%. CONCLUSIONS: There was no clinically significant difference in spherical equivalent refraction or level of cycloplegia at 20- and 30-minutes post-eyedrop instillation. The latent time between drop instillation and measurement of refractive error may be reduced to 20 minutes in White 12-13-year-olds and young adults. Further studies must determine if these results persist in younger children and non-White populations.

Comparison of topical anesthetics for intravitreal injections : a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To determine whether there is a difference in anesthetic effect between topical proparacaine drops, 4% lidocaine solution, or 3.5% lidocaine gel, and whether this has an impact on the overall injection experience. METHODS: One hundred and twenty sequential patients undergoing intravitreal injections were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: proparacaine 0.5% drops (Group 1), proparacaine + 4% lidocaine-soaked cotton tipped swabs (Group 2), or 3.5% lidocaine gel (Group 3). Discomfort associated with the lid speculum, with the needle, and with burning sensation was graded on a scale of 0 to 10 (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain ever). The overall injection experience was graded as Excellent, Very Good, Fair, Poor, or Awful. RESULTS: The average lid speculum pain score for Group 1 was 0.85, Group 2 was 0.50, and Group 3 was 0.65 (P = 0.32). The average needle pain score for Group 1 was 1.78, Group 2 was 1.75, and Group 3 was 1.48 (P = 0.38). The average burning pain score for Group 1 was 1.45, Group 2 was 1.58, and Group 3 was 1.13 (P = 0.23). Overall satisfaction was rated as Excellent or Very Good in 95%, 97.5%, and 92.5% of Group 1, 2, and 3 patients, respectively (P = 0.64). CONCLUSION: The use of topical proparacaine drops provides very effective and cost-effective anesthesia during office-based intravitreal injections.

Combined topical and intracameral anesthesia for Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.

To evaluate the use of combined topical and intracameral anesthesia for Descemet's stripping automated keratoplasty (DSAEK). This was a retrospective comparative cohort analysis consisting of 10 eyes in 10 consecutive patients undergoing DSAEK surgery with combined topical and intracameral anesthesia. These cases were compared with 21 randomly selected controls during the same time period undergoing DSAEK surgery performed under retrobulbar anesthesia. Incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications, and endothelial cell counts were compared. In all cases, DSAEK was completed without intraoperative complications. All patients tolerated the procedure well. There were 6 cases of postoperative graft dislocation requiring rebubbling, and no cases of primary failure or endophthalmitis. No significant difference in endothelial cell counts was found at final follow-up. Short-term results suggest that combined topical and intracameral anesthesia is as safe and effective for DSAEK in cooperative patients when compared to retrobulbar anesthesia. It may thereby be an alternative anesthetic modality for patients in whom retrobulbar or peribulbar anesthesia may be risky or contraindicated.