In-office compounding of lidocaine-epinephrine: An option for anesthesia preparation before skin biopsy

Pearlman, Ross L; Feldman, Steven R.; Cardwell, Leah A.; Kesty, Katarina

doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2018.02.008

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The finding of a low incidence of minor infection in this study is consistent with previous data suggesting that this is a safe practice. 8,14,15 This study is limited by the possibility that rare patients may have sought care for infections in other practice settings, leading to underdetection; conversely, some patients considered as cases in this study did not have confirmatory wound cultures and may not have truly had infections, leading to the overestimation of the infection rate. In addition, some patients may have had minor infections which were self-treated with over-the-counter antibiotic ointment and therefore not documented.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…The finding of a low incidence of minor infection in this study is consistent with previous data suggesting that this is a safe practice. 8,14,15…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2,[11][12][13] Recently, there has been an increased scrutiny and regulation of in-office compounding of buffered lidocaine. Available data have not shown evidence of an increased infection risk with buffered lidocaine for cutaneous procedures 8,14 ; however, the number and size of studies are limited, and additional data may help to inform the regulatory policy. The data set in this study includes 9,031 procedures in which patients were anesthetized with buffered lidocaine prepared in office.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because recent theoretical concerns for infection risk have prompted the increased regulation of in-office compounding of buffered lidocaine, there has been a call for additional data to guide policy. 8 The authors have therefore specified the protocol for in-office compounding of lidocaine used in the clinic during the timeframe of the study.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Risk Factors for Infection After Minor Dermatologic Procedures: A Case–Control Study

Matos

Sturm

Buhnerkempe

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND There are limited published data regarding the incidence and risk factors for infection after minor dermatologic procedures, such as skin biopsy, shave, and curettage. Prior studies of infection risk after dermatologic procedures have often not specified the method of preparation of local anesthetic. OBJECTIVE To assess the incidence and risk factors for infection after minor procedures performed in a general dermatology clinic using buffered lidocaine prepared in office. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this retrospective case–control study, the medical record was searched for cases of infection after skin biopsies, shaves, conventional excisions, and destructions performed in a general dermatology clinic over a 4-year period. Patient and procedure characteristics were compared with uninfected controls. RESULTS Of 9,031 procedures performed during the study period, there were 34 infections (0.4%). The odds of infection for procedures on the arm and leg were 5.29 and 9.28 times higher, respectively, than those on the head/neck. There was no significant effect of age, sex, smoking, immunosuppression, diabetes, or anticoagulation. CONCLUSION The incidence of infection is low after minor dermatologic procedures performed with local anesthesia using buffered lidocaine prepared in office. There is a higher risk of infection on the arm and leg compared with the head and neck.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…The finding of a low incidence of minor infection in this study is consistent with previous data suggesting that this is a safe practice. 8,14,15…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%