Randomized trial of diphenhydramine versus benzyl alcohol with epinephrine as an alternative to lidocaine local anesthesia

被引:27
作者
Bartfield, JM [1 ]
Jandreau, SW [1 ]
Raccio-Robak, N [1 ]
机构
[1] Albany Med Coll, Dept Emergency Med A139, Albany, NY 12208 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0196-0644(98)70062-9
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Study objectives: We compared the pain of infiltration and anesthetic effects of .9% benzyl alcohol with epinephrine, 1% diphenhydramine, and .9% buffered lidocaine. Methods: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study comparing benzyl alcohol, diphenhydramine, and lidocaine was carried out on adult volunteers. Each subject received all 3 injections in a standardized manner. Pain of infiltration was measured on a 100-mm Visual analog pain scale and analyzed with a Kruskal-Wallis test. Duration of anesthesia was assessed at 5-minute intervals for a maximum of 45 minutes and compared with the use of survival analysis techniques by a log-rank test. Return of sensation by 45 minutes was evaluated with an exact chi(2) test. All tests were 2-tailed, with significance defined as P<.05. Results: Thirty subjects were enrolled. The diphenhydramine median pain score was 55 mm, compared with 12.5 mm for lidocaine and 5 mm for benzyl alcohol (P=.001). Pairwise comparisons showed that all possible combinations were statistically significant. The 3 anesthetics were different with respect to duration of anesthesia (P<.001). Pairwise comparisons revealed a longer duration of anesthesia for lidocaine than for diphenhydramine or benzyl alcohol, but no significant difference was found between diphenhydramine and benzyl alcohol. Pain sensation returned within the 45-minute study period in only 3 of 30 lidocaine injections, compared with 11 of 30 benzyl alcohol injections and 19 of 30 diphenhydramine injections (P=.001). Conclusion: Benzyl alcohol is a better alternative than diphenhydramine as a local anesthetic for lidocaine-allergic patients.
引用
收藏
页码:650 / 654
页数:5
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
ADRIANI J, 1981, SOUTHERN MED J, V74, P694, DOI 10.1097/00007611-198106000-00015
[2]   THE EFFECTS OF WARMING AND BUFFERING ON PAIN OF INFILTRATION OF LIDOCAINE [J].
BARTFIELD, JM ;
CRISAFULLI, KM ;
RACCIOROBAK, N ;
SALLUZZO, RF .
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1995, 2 (04) :254-258
[3]  
CHANDLER MJ, 1987, J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUN, V79, P983
[4]   DOUBLE-BLINDED COMPARISON OF DIPHENHYDRAMINE VERSUS LIDOCAINE AS A LOCAL-ANESTHETIC [J].
DIRE, DJ ;
HOGAN, DE .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1993, 22 (09) :1419-1422
[5]   1-PERCENT LIDOCAINE VERSUS 0.5-PERCENT DIPHENHYDRAMINE FOR LOCAL-ANESTHESIA IN MINOR LACERATION REPAIR [J].
ERNST, AA ;
MARVEZVALLS, E ;
MALL, G ;
PATTERSON, J ;
XIE, XM ;
WEISS, SJ .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1994, 23 (06) :1328-1332
[6]   LIDOCAINE VERSUS DIPHENHYDRAMINE FOR ANESTHESIA IN THE REPAIR OF MINOR LACERATIONS [J].
ERNST, AA ;
ANAND, P ;
NICK, T ;
WASSMUTH, S .
JOURNAL OF TRAUMA-INJURY INFECTION AND CRITICAL CARE, 1993, 34 (03) :354-357
[7]   VALIDATION OF DIPHENHYDRAMINE AS A DERMAL LOCAL-ANESTHETIC [J].
GREEN, SM ;
ROTHROCK, SG ;
GORCHYNSKI, J .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1994, 23 (06) :1284-1289
[8]   ADMINISTRATION OF LOCAL-ANESTHETICS TO PATIENTS WITH A HISTORY OF PRIOR ADVERSE REACTION [J].
INCAUDO, G ;
SCHATZ, M ;
PATTERSON, R ;
ROSENBERG, M ;
YAMAMOTO, F ;
HAMBURGER, RN .
JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 1978, 61 (05) :339-345
[9]  
KIMURA ET, 1971, TOXICOL APPL PHARM, V18, P54
[10]  
MARTIN S, 1996, ACAD EMERG MED, V3, P493