TY - JOUR
T1 - A randomized, double-blind comparison of the total dose of 1.0% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine versus 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine required for effective local anesthesia during Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancers
AU - Morganroth, Pamela A.
AU - Gelfand, Joel M.
AU - Jambusaria, Anokhi
AU - Margolis, David J.
AU - Miller, Christopher J.
PY - 2009/3/1
Y1 - 2009/3/1
N2 - Objective: We sought to compare total lidocaine dose and patient comfort when using 1.0% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine versus 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine during Mohs micrographic surgery. Methods: In all, 149 patients were randomized to receive 1.0% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine during Mohs micrographic surgery. The total dose of lidocaine and measures of patient comfort were recorded. Results: Compared with the 1.0% lidocaine group, there was a 52% reduction in lidocaine dose in the 0.5% group (mean difference, 147.85 mg; 95% confidence interval, 108.15-187.55; P < .001). Patient comfort was equivalent in both groups, as evidenced by the similar mean visual analog scale scores (P = .48) and mean volumes of rescue lidocaine administered (P = .18). Limitations: No lidocaine blood levels were measured, and one Mohs surgeon performed all surgeries. Conclusion: The dose of 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine provides pain control equivalent to 1.0% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine at approximately half the total lidocaine dose.
AB - Objective: We sought to compare total lidocaine dose and patient comfort when using 1.0% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine versus 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine during Mohs micrographic surgery. Methods: In all, 149 patients were randomized to receive 1.0% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine or 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine during Mohs micrographic surgery. The total dose of lidocaine and measures of patient comfort were recorded. Results: Compared with the 1.0% lidocaine group, there was a 52% reduction in lidocaine dose in the 0.5% group (mean difference, 147.85 mg; 95% confidence interval, 108.15-187.55; P < .001). Patient comfort was equivalent in both groups, as evidenced by the similar mean visual analog scale scores (P = .48) and mean volumes of rescue lidocaine administered (P = .18). Limitations: No lidocaine blood levels were measured, and one Mohs surgeon performed all surgeries. Conclusion: The dose of 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine provides pain control equivalent to 1.0% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine at approximately half the total lidocaine dose.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=60149085565&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=60149085565&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jaad.2008.08.001
DO - 10.1016/j.jaad.2008.08.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 19231641
AN - SCOPUS:60149085565
SN - 0190-9622
VL - 60
SP - 444
EP - 452
JO - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
JF - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
IS - 3
ER -