Oxybuprocaine 0.4% eye drops 0.5ml unit dose preservative free

BackgroundThe rapid rise in intravitreal injections (IVIs) for vitreoretinal disorders underscores the need to optimize the procedure and support long-term patient compliance. Patient-reported pain and discomfort remain significant barriers to adherence. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of various local anesthetic methods for mitigating pain during IVIs.MethodsConducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search of PubMed and Google Scholar was performed to identify English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Eligible studies included patients aged 18 years and older receiving local anesthesia for IVIs, where pain was quantified using standard visual or oral analog scales (0-10 or 0-100).ResultsOur systematic review and meta-analysis included 14 RCTs comprising 1,300 patients. Analysis of topical lidocaine, tetracaine, and proparacaine formulations showed comparable analgesic efficacy, with all agents consistently achieving mild mean Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores. No clinically meaningful superiority was identified among these primary agents (p = 0.62). Adjunctive therapies, particularly physical cooling (e.g., ice patches), demonstrated significant pain-reducing potential. While oxybuprocaine alone was less effective, its combination with physical cooling achieved the lowest mean pain scores. Meanwhile, topical NSAIDs showed limited additional benefit. Regarding safety, subconjunctival anesthetic injections were associated with a significantly higher incidence of subconjunctival hemorrhage and chemosis compared to topical applications, suggesting that topical strategies provide a favorable safety and efficacy profile for routine intravitreal injections.ConclusionIn conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis confirms that no single topical anesthetic is superior for intravitreal injections; all primary agents provide comparable, effective pain control. Topical application is safer than subconjunctival injection, which is associated with higher rates of hemorrhage and chemosis. Consequently, clinical protocols should standardize low-risk topical methods and incorporate simple non-pharmacological adjuncts, such as physical cooling, to optimize patient comfort.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Background. The purpose of this study was to determine whether oxybuprocaine hydrochloride gel could alleviate pain during male catheterization. Methods. Between September 2021 and March 2022, a randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Urology Department of Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital (China). A total of 192 adult male patients requiring catheterization were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of two groups: 96 in the test group and 96 in the control group. The test group included patients who received oxybuprocaine hydrochloride gel as urethral lubricant, while patients in the control group received liquid paraffin. The preoperative and postoperative pain scores were compared using nonparametric tests. Results. At the baseline, there was no significant difference between the two groups. There was no significant difference in preoperative pain scores between the test group (mean ± SD = 20.04 ± 2.68 mm) and the control group (mean ± SD = 20.21 ± 3.23 mm) (p = 0.694). Postoperative pain scores increased significantly in the test (mean ± SD = 31.98 ± 2.57 mm, p < 0.001) and control groups (mean ± SD = 38.96 ± 2.02 mm, p < 0.001) groups. Postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the test group (mean ± SD = 31.98 ± 2.57 mm) than those in the control group (mean ± SD = 38.96 ± 2.02 mm (p < 0.001). Conclusions. The use of oxybuprocaine hydrochloride gel significantly reduced pain during male urethral catheterization. The study provides evidence for clinicians to use oxybuprocaine hydrochloride gel during male catheterization.

Abstract licence: CC BY 4.0

Topical anesthetics have been used for radiofrequency ablation of great saphenous vein insufficiency. A total of 74 patients with great saphenous vein insufficiency treated at our center between February 2021 and August 2022 were enrolled. The patients were selected and divided into an oxybuprocaine group(n = 30) and a lidocaine group (n = 44). The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate intraoperative and postoperative pain. Patient satisfaction with anesthesia, maintenance time of anesthesia, and disturbance of the surgeons were also recorded and assessed. The VAS scores and other indices of the 2 groups were compared to assess the effectiveness of anesthesia. Perioperative surgical complications and painkiller use were also recorded. The median VAS score of the patients during the process was 2 in both groups, and the difference between the groups was not statistically significant. In the 2 groups, 93.33% of the patients in the oxybuprocaine group and 93.18% of the patients in the lidocaine group were satisfed with the anesthesia. Nine patients in the lidocaine group and 14 in the oxybuprocaine group received additional anesthetic drugs. The average maintenance time of anesthesia was longer in the lidocaine group. No serious complications occurred in either of the groups. Both oxybuprocaine and lidocaine topical anesthesia combined with tumescent anesthesia could provide effective pain control in radiofrequency ablation treatment of great saphenous vein insufficiency. Although the average maintenance time of anesthesia was longer in the lidocaine group, there was no difference in the associated complications and pain control.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC 4.0