Impact of Lidocaine Concentration on Analgesic Efficacy and Adverse Events in Dermatologic Infiltrative Anesthesia
Keywords:
lidocaine, infiltrative anesthesia, dermatologic procedures, VASAbstract
Introduction: Infiltrative anesthesia with lidocaine plays a vital role in pain management during dermatologic procedures, ensuring patient comfort throughout the process.
Objective: We aimed to investigate the correlation between three different concentrations of lidocaine (2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine diluted at ratios of 1:2, 1:4, and 1:6) used in infiltrative anesthesia and their analgesic efficacy and adverse effects in dermatologic procedures.
Methods: This study employed a randomized design, with 240 patients assigned to receive varying concentrations of lidocaine with epinephrine (2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine diluted at ratios of 1:2, 1:4, or 1:6) during 7 common dermatologic procedures: punch biopsy, excisional biopsy, CO2 laser biopsy, surgical excision, CO2 laser excision, fractional CO2 laser treatment, and filler injection. Total lidocaine dosage and patient comfort assessments were recorded for each participant.
Results: All 3 lidocaine concentrations demonstrated comparable analgesic efficacy during the procedures, as measured by visual analog scale scores. The 1:6 dilution group required a significantly lower lidocaine dose, with a 69.3% reduction compared to the 1:4 dilution group and an 87.5% reduction compared to the 1:2 dilution group (p < 0.001). The 1:6 dilution group experienced significantly less pain during injection than that of the 1:4 dilution group and the 1:2 dilution group (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Lidocaine 2% with 1:100,000 epinephrine at dilutions ranging from 1:2 to 1:6 for infiltrative anesthesia in dermatologic procedures provided similar analgesic efficacy. Importantly, the 1:6 dilution significantly reduced both injection pain and total lidocaine dosage. More studies are required to confirm our results.
References
Kouba DJ, LoPiccolo MC, Alam M, et al. Guidelines for the use of local anesthesia in office-based dermatologic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016. 74(6): 1201-19. PMID: 26951939. DOI:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.01.022
Morganroth PA, Koshnick RL, Ratz JL. A randomized, double-blind comparison of the total dose of 1.0% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine versus 0.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine required for effective local anesthesia during Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;60(3):444–452. PMID: 19231641. DOI:10.1016/j.jaad.2008.08.001
Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T, French M. Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(S11):S240–S252. PMID: 22588748. DOI:10.1002/acr.20543
Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(7):798–804. PMID: 16000093. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01121.x
Bijur PE, Silver W, Gallagher EJ. Reliability of the visual analog scale for measurement of acute pain. Acad Emerg Med. 2001;8(12):1153–1157. PMID: 11733293 DOI:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01132.x
Scott J, Huskisson EC. Vertical or horizontal visual analogue scales. Ann Rheum Dis. 1979;38(6):560. PMID: 317239. DOI:10.1136/ard.38.6.560
McCormack HM, Horne DJ, Sheather S. Clinical applications of visual analogue scales: a critical review. Psychol Med. 1988;18:1007–1019. PMID: 3078045. DOI:10.1017/s0033291700009934
Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, Buckingham B. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain. 1983;17(1):45–56. PMID: 6226917. DOI:10.1016/0304-3959(83)90126-4
Samritin S, Purnama B, Ulfah M. A meta-analysis study of the effect of the blended learning model on students’ mathematics learning achievement. Jurnal Elemen. 2023;9(1):16. DOI:10.29408/jel.v9i1.6141
Howe NR, Williams JM. Pain of injection and duration of anesthesia for intradermal infiltration of lidocaine, bupivacaine, and etidocaine. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1994;20:459-64. PMID: 8034840 . DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4725.1994.tb03216.x
Vent A, Wu Y, Ghadially R, et al. Buffered lidocaine 1%/epinephrine 1:100,000 with sodium bicarbonate in a 3:1 ratio is less painful than a 9:1 ratio: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83(1):159–165. PMID: 31958526. DOI:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.09.088
Zaiac M, Hochman LG. Virtually painless local anesthesia: diluted lidocaine proves to be superior to buffered lidocaine for subcutaneous infiltration. J Drugs Dermatol. 2012;11(10):39–42. PMID: 23134997
Malamed SF. Pharmacology of local anesthetics. In: Malamed SF, ed. Handbook of Local Anesthesia. 6th ed. Elsevier; 2019:27–39.
Adams HA, Hammersen F, Heckmann M, et al. Plasma level of lidocaine and epinephrine in local anesthesia with addition of colloid in eye surgery. Fortschr Ophthalmol. 1990;87(2):209–213. PMID: 1694158
Donald MJ, Derbyshire S. Lignocaine toxicity: a complication of local anaesthesia administered in the community. Emerg Med J. 2004;21(2):249–250. PMID: 14988367. DOI:10.1136/emj.2003.008730
Piveral K. Systemic lidocaine absorption during liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987;80(4):643. PMID: 3659178. DOI:10.1097/00006534-198710000-00038
Giordano CN, Lidsky ME, Lyon VB. Local anesthesia: evidence, strategies, and safety. Curr Dermatol Rep. 2015;4:97–104. DOI:10.1007/s13671-015-0110-9
Frank SG, Lalonde DH. How acidic is the lidocaine we are injecting, and how much bicarbonate should we add? Can J Plast Surg. 2012;20(2):71–73. PMID: 23730153. DOI:10.1177/229255031202000207
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Van Thanh Le Thai, Tri Thong Nguyen, Quoc Hung Ta, Anh Tuan Ngo, Thanh Yen Thai Thanh Yen, Phuong Thao Nguyen, Vi Anh Le, Ngoc Khanh Nam Tran, Hanh Vy Tran
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Dermatology Practical & Conceptual applies a Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) to all works we publish (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Authors retain the copyright for their published work.
How to Cite
Share
