Search

Objective. To compare the effectiveness of four topical anesthetics that do not contain cocaine with that of topical tetracaine-adrenaline-cocaine (TAC) and lidocaine infiltration during laceration repair in children. Design. This was a randomized, blinded trial. Setting. The study was conducted in the emergency department of a large children's hospital. Participants. Subjects were children 2 years of age or older with a laceration 5 cm or less in length that required suturing. Interventions. Patients were randomly assigned to receive one of four noncocaine-containing topical anesthetics, topical TAC, or lidocaine infiltration anesthesia before laceration repair. Outcome Measures. Outcome measures assessed pain perceptions using a Visual Analogue Scale, Likert scale, and Anesthetic Effectiveness scale. Distress behaviors of patients were measured with the Restrained Infants and Children Distress Rating Scale. Results. Two hundred forty patients were enrolled in the study. Using α = 0.05 and β = 0.2, there was statistical power to detect differences of 0.3 to 1.3 U for the outcome measures used. The bupivacaine-norepinephrine topical solution (Bupivanor) performed better than the other three new topical preparations. It provided effective wound anesthesia during laceration repair, especially for lacerations of the face and scalp, where it was consistently rated as effective as TAC and 1% lidocaine infiltration by all observer groups for all outcome measures. There was a 4% overall wound complication rate, including one wound infection. Conclusion. Bupivanor is an effective alternative to TAC and lidocaine infiltration for local anesthesia during laceration repair, especially on the face and scalp. The effectiveness of Bupivanor on the face is important, because it is here where TAC is most likely inadvertently to come into contact with mucous membranes and result in systemic toxicity. Because pain and distress scores did not take into consideration the pain associated with the initial injection of lidocaine, the findings of this study conservatively estimate Bupivanor's effectiveness compared with lidocaine infiltration.

The study objective was to compare the topical anesthetic LAT (4% lidocaine, 1:2,000 adrenaline, 1% tetracaine) to TAC (0.5% tetracaine, 1:2,000 adrenaline, 11.8% cocaine) for efficacy, adverse effects, and costs. The study design was a randomized, prospective, double blind clinical trial set in an inner-city emergency department with an emergency medicine residency program. Adults with linear lacerations of the face or scalp were eligible for inclusion in the study. Patients had lacerations anesthetized with topical TAC or LAT according to a random numbers table. A total of 95 patients were included in the study with 47 receiving TAC and 48 receiving LAT. Patients stated the number of sutures causing pain and patients and physicians rated the overall pain of suturing using a standard visual analog scale (VAS). The power of the study to determine a ranked sum difference of 15 was 0.8. Visual analog scale results and number and percentage of sutures causing pain were compared using Wilcoxon's Rank Sum Test. According to patients, the percentage of sutures causing pain was significantly fewer for LAT than TAC (P = .036, Interquartile Range 0.13 to 0.0 for LAT, 0.25 to 0 for TAC). Physicians found LAT statistically more effective than TAC (P = .0093, Interquartile Range 1 to 0 for LAT, 2 to 0 for TAC) but patients did not report a difference (P = .266, Interquartile Range 1 to 0 for both LAT and TAC). Our cost per application was $3.00 for LAT compared to $35.00 for TAC. Follow-up was accomplished in 91 of 95 patients (95%) with no reported complications for either medication.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Study objective. The purpose of the present study is to compare LAT gel (4% lidocaine, 1:2000 adrenaline, 0.5% tetracaine) to TAC gel (0.5% tetracaine, 1:2000 adrenaline, 11.8% cocaine) for efficacy, side effects, and costs in children aged 5 to 17 years with facial or scalp lacerations. Design. Randomized, prospective, double-blinded clinical trial. Setting. Inner-city Emergency Department with an Emergency Medicine residency program. Patients or other participants. Children aged 5 to 17 years with linear lacerations of the face or scalp. Intervention. After informed consent was obtained patients had lacerations anesthetized with topical TAC or LAT gel according to a random numbers table. Measurements and main results. A total of 95 patients were included in the statistical analysis with 47 receiving TAC and 48 receiving LAT. Physicians and patients/parents separately rated the overall pain of suturing using a modified multidimensional scale for pain assessment specifically for children. Patients/parents also stated the number of sutures causing pain. The power of the study to determine a ranked sum difference of 15 was 0.8. Multidimensional rating scale results and number and percentage of sutures causing pain were compared using Wilcoxon's rank sum test. According to patients no difference could be detected in percent of sutures causing pain in the LAT versus TAC group (P = .51). Using the multidimensional scale, physicians and patients/parents found LAT statistically the same as TAC in effectiveness (P = .80 for physicians and P = .71 for patients). Cost per application was $3.00 for LAT compared to $35.00 for TAC. Follow-up was accomplished in 85 of 95 participants in the study with no reported complications for either medication. Conclusion. LAT gel worked as well as TAC gel for topical anesthesia in facial and scalp lacerations. Considering the advantages of a noncontrolled substance and less expense, LAT gel appears to be better suited than TAC gel for topical anesthesia in laceration repair in children.

We compared the effect of topical 0.5% tetracaine, 1:2,000 epinephrine, and 11.8% cocaine (TAC) with 1% lidocaine infiltration on bacterial proliferation in experimental lacerations. Forty-eight lacerations were made on the backs of Hampshire pigs, inoculated by injection with infectious doses of Staphylococcus aureus and randomly anesthetized with either topical TAC or lidocaine infiltration. Wounds were sutured, and quantitative cultures were obtained by excision after 48 hours. The mean log10 bacteria per gram of tissue for wounds anesthetized with TAC was 6.818 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.07 to 7.54) compared with 6.820 (95% CI, 5.91 to 7.75) for those treated with lidocaine; this difference was not significant (P less than .05 by paired two-tailed t test). The probability of failing to detect an intergroup difference of 0.5 log10 bacteria per gram was less than .0001. TAC does not increase bacterial proliferation more than lidocaine infiltration in contaminated experimental porcine lacerations.

Lacerations requiring sutures are a common surgical emergency in children. Traditional anesthesia prior to suturing has been intradermal lidocaine. TAC (0.5% tetracaine, 1:2,000 adrenalin, 11.8% cocaine) is a topically applied anesthetic. A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical study was conducted to test the hypothesis that topical TAC and intradermal lidocaine are equally efficacious with respect to patient compliance with the suturing process, ie, anesthetic application and placement of sutures, and development of wound complications. Patients less than 18 years old, with lacerations 5 cm or less in length, located in well vascularized, nonmucous membrane areas were included. Patients were entered into the intradermal or topical groups; the intradermal group received lidocaine and the topical group was randomized to receive either TAC or placebo. One hundred fifty-one patients were enrolled in the study. There was no significant difference in the rates of successful initial anesthesia with TAC (89%) and lidocaine (79%). TAC was significantly better (P less than .002) with regard to patient compliance with the suturing process than lidocaine or placebo. Seventeen percent of patients who received placebo had initial anesthesia. These results suggest that TAC, when applied correctly, may be the preferred anesthetic for laceration repair in children.

To evaluate a solution of tetracaine (0.5%), adrenaline 1:2,000, and cocaine (11.8%) as a topical anesthetic in the repair of minor lacerations, a prospective randomized study was performed comparing it with lidocaine infiltration. One hundred fifty-eight patients of a primarily pediatric age group were treated in the emergency department of Madigan Army Medical Center. Anesthetic efficacy was subjectively evaluated. Other variables observed were patient/parent acceptance of the anesthesia, time required for surgical repair, and wound complication rates. No significant difference was found in the anesthetic efficacy of topical TAC and lidocaine infiltration. Time for surgical repair was significantly reduced, and patient acceptance of topical TAC was markedly improved over lidocaine infiltration. Wound complication rates were not significantly different. This form of anesthesia has definite benefits for the emergency physician because it results in a more manageable patient, with subsequent reduction in physician time required to treat minor lacerations in pediatric patients.

The topical anesthetic solution TAC (tetracaine, adrenaline, cocaine) has gained widespread acceptance as the preferred local anesthetic for repairing skin lacerations in children. Despite this popularity, there are no universally accepted guidelines for its application. We report the case of a 6-month-old infant who had respiratory distress and seizures after TAC administration. In addition, we surveyed emergency departments within the state of Virginia regarding their guidelines for TAC application in children. Of the 91 hospitals surveyed, 32 (35%) currently administer TAC, and 14 (44%) of these have no guidelines regarding its use. Among the 20 (63%) with restrictions, there is wide variability in the way it is prescribed. TAC solution is a highly potent anesthetic agent with significant toxicity potential. Research into appropriate dosages, absorption, and actions needs to be undertaken before its widespread acceptance as the drug of choice for providing local anesthesia in children.