Bupivacaine-Induced Myotoxicity and Its Effect on Botulinum Toxin Paresis

Yen, Michael T.; Wall, V.

doi:10.1097/sap.0b013e318045a083

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yen and colleagues 42 conducted a randomized, double‐blind study with 16 patients treated for glabellar furrows. OnabotulinumtoxinA reconstituted with 0.75% bupivacaine was injected into one corrugator, and the contralateral muscle received the same product reconstituted with unpreserved saline.…”

Section: Reconstitutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Handling Botulinum Toxins

Almeida

Secco

Carruthers

2011

Dermatologic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Reconstitutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Handling Botulinum Toxins

Almeida

Secco

Carruthers

2011

Dermatologic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These include co-treatment with the immunotoxin ricinmAb35, 14 insulin growth factor binding proteins, 15 and bupivacaine. 16 The goal of our research is to test agents that have the potential to enhance the duration of paralysis, which would potentially decrease the number of "lifetime" injections of botulinum toxin needed by patients. The hormone corticotropin releasing factor (CRF) has potent anti-inflammatory effects when applied locally in tissues for treatment of pain.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulating Neuromuscular Junction Density Changes in Botulinum Toxin–Treated Orbicularis Oculi Muscle

Harrison¹,

Berbos

Zaldívar

et al. 2011

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The return of function after botulinum toxin-induced muscle paralysis is due to terminal sprouting and formation of new neuromuscular junctions within the paralyzed muscles. Injection with CRF or anti-IGFIR after botulinum toxin treatment prevents this sprouting, which in turn should increase the duration of effectiveness of single botulinum toxin treatments. Future physiology studies will address this. Prolonging botulinum toxin's clinical efficacy should decrease the number of injections needed for patient muscle spasm relief, decreasing the risk of negative side effects and changes in drug effectiveness that often occurs over a lifetime of botulinum toxin exposure.

show abstract

“…Since then, providers have remained hesitant to administer BoNT‐A and local anesthetic together or in close succession for patients with headache; however, one study offering 10 patients BoNT‐A injections (20–25 U) following a positive response to local anesthetic (lidocaine 2%) injection overlying the corrugator muscle found sustainable benefits with only brow ptosis as a transient side effect 14 . Meanwhile, numerous studies report the safe use of these agents for other purposes, such as primary axillary hyperhidrosis, spasticity, cremasteric synkinesis, and vaginismus 15–21 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…b Kruskal-Wallis p-value. c Type 3 Wald p-value.Overall14 Meanwhile, numerous studies report the safe use of these agents for other purposes, such as primary axillary hyperhidrosis, spasticity, cremasteric synkinesis, and vaginismus [15][16][17][18][19][20][21].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequential administration of peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of chronic migraine and other headache disorders—A retrospective tolerability and safety study

Anderson,

Iser,

Hirte

et al. 2024

Headache

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo determine the tolerability and safety of concurrent peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA treatment during a single outpatient clinic procedure visit.BackgroundProcedural interventions are available for the treatment of headache disorders. OnabotulinumtoxinA and peripheral nerve blocks are used as alternatives or in addition to oral therapies to reduce the frequency and intensity of migraine attacks. There is currently a lack of safety data focusing on the sequential administration of local anesthetic via peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA during a single clinical encounter for the treatment of headache. The primary aim of the study was to determine the safety and tolerability of concurrent peripheral nerve blockade and onabotulinumtoxinA injections during a single outpatient clinic procedure visit. We hypothesized that the dual intervention would be safe and well tolerated by patients with chronic migraine and other headache disorders.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed using clinical data from patients seen by multiple providers over a 16‐month timeframe at one outpatient headache clinic. Patients were identified by procedure codes and those receiving peripheral nerve block(s) and onabotulinumtoxinA injections during a single encounter within the study period were eligible for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were (1) patients 18 years and older who were (2) receiving both peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA injections for the treatment of chronic migraine. Patients were excluded if they were under age 18, received their procedure outside of the clinic (emergency room, inpatient ward), or were receiving sphenopalatine ganglion blocks. Age‐ and sex‐matched patients who received one procedure, either peripheral nerve blocks or onabotulinumtoxinA, were used for control. The primary outcome of this safety study was the number of adverse events that occurred in the dual intervention group compared to the single intervention control arms. Information regarding adverse events was gathered via retrospective chart review. If an adverse event was recorded, it was then graded by the reviewer utilizing the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events ranging from Grade 1 Mild Event to Grade 5 Death. Additionally, it was noted whether the adverse event led to treatment discontinuation.ResultsIn total, 375 patients were considered eligible for inclusion in the study. After age and sex matching of controls, 131 patients receiving dual intervention were able to be compared to 131 patients receiving onabotulinumtoxinA alone and 104 patients receiving dual intervention were able to be compared to 104 patients receiving peripheral nerve block(s) alone. The primary endpoint analysis showed no significant difference in total adverse events between dual intervention compared to nerve blocks alone or onabotulinumtoxinA alone. The number of adverse events that led to treatment discontinuation approached but did not reach statistical significance for those receiving dual intervention versus onabotulinumtoxinA alone in the number of adverse events that led to treatment termination (4.6%, 6/131 vs. 0.8%, 1/131, p = 0.065); however, the number of patients who discontinued therapy was not significantly different between those groups (2.3%, 3/131 vs. 0.8%, 1/131; p = 0.314; odds ratio 0.3 [0–3.2]; p = 0.338).ConclusionsIn this retrospective chart review, there was no significant difference in adverse events or therapy discontinuation between patients receiving sequential peripheral nerve block(s) and onabotulinumtoxinA injections versus those receiving either peripheral nerve block(s) or onabotulinumtoxinA injections alone. As a result, we concluded that the combination procedure is likely safe and well tolerated in routine clinical practice.

show abstract

Bupivacaine-Induced Myotoxicity and Its Effect on Botulinum Toxin Paresis

Cited by 7 publications

References 14 publications

Handling Botulinum Toxins

Handling Botulinum Toxins

Modulating Neuromuscular Junction Density Changes in Botulinum Toxin–Treated Orbicularis Oculi Muscle

Sequential administration of peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of chronic migraine and other headache disorders—A retrospective tolerability and safety study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About