You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, reducing aerosol-generating procedures became fundamental, particularly in ophthalmic surgeries traditionally performed under general anesthesia (GA). Regional anesthesia, such as sub-Tenon’s block (STB), is widely used in vitreoretinal surgeries, offering a safer alternative by avoiding airway manipulation. However, the altered orbital anatomy in patients with previous scleral explant surgery creates unique challenges to STB application. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and feasibility of STB in patients after encircling band surgery. Methods: This retrospective analysis included 46 patients with a history of scleral explant surgery, undergoing vitreoretinal procedures at the Bern University Hospital. All procedures were conducted under STB with either analgosedation or GA for additional support when required. An ophthalmic surgeon or an experienced anesthesiologist performed the STBs. Data collected included block success rate, procedural difficulty, incidence of chemosis, and patient satisfaction. The Institutional Ethics Committee approved this study, and all participants provided informed consent. Results: STB was successfully administered in 93.5% of cases, with only three unsuccessful blocks. Block placement was rated as easy in 55% of cases, moderately difficult in 28%, and difficult in 17%. Chemosis was observed in 24% of patients, with severe cases in only 4%. Patient satisfaction scores were high, with most patients expressing satisfaction with the STB procedure. Conversion to GA was required in only one case due to alcohol withdrawal-related agitation. Discussion: The high success rate and minimal complications suggest that STB is a feasible and safe alternative to GA in patients with prior scleral buckling surgery. The altered orbital anatomy presents potential challenges, including scar tissue and compartmentalization, which may lead to patchy anesthesia. However, the use of STB avoids the risks associated with GA and may be especially beneficial for elderly or frail patients. Future studies should further investigate the hemodynamic implications of STB in these cases and the potential for ultrasound-guided techniques to improve accuracy and safety.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Bern University Hospital, Inselspital, 3010 Bern, Switzerland
2 Institute for Medical Education, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland; CINTESIS@RISE, Centre for Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal
3 Department of Ophthalmology, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, 9007 St. Gallen, Switzerland