ArticleJournal of surgery and research2026
Risk-Stratified Use of Topical and Infiltrative Local Anesthetics in High-Risk Dermatologic Surgery.
Article in Journal of surgery and research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Augmentation Mammoplasty Under Tumescent Local Anesthesia: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of 1644 Consecutive Cases-Safety and Efficacy in Subglandular and Submuscular Approaches.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Drug-induced adverse events in modern pharmacotherapy: mechanisms, clinical manifestations, and implications for risk assessment and management.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Local anesthetics are fundamental to dermatologic practice, yet their safety profile requires nuanced understanding in high-risk contexts including end-arterial sites, barrier-compromised skin, and scenarios predisposing to systemic toxicity. This narrative review synthesizes contemporary evidence across these three interacting domains to provide an integrated, risk-stratified framework for clinical decision-making. Regarding end-arterial territories, over two decades of clinical evidence encompassing more than 200,000 digital and acral injections has effectively dismantled the historical dogma against epinephrine use in digits, nose, ear, and penis, demonstrating an excellent safety profile when dilute concentrations are used in patients with adequate perfusion, with phentolamine providing reliable rescue for rare, prolonged vasoconstriction. In barrier-compromised skin (e.g. burns, ulcers, and inflammatory dermatoses) topical anesthetics function as absorption amplifiers, with dramatically accelerated systemic uptake that can precipitate local anesthetic systemic toxicity or prilocaine- and benzocaine-induced methemoglobinemia, particularly in infants and frail elderly patients. For large, denuded areas, dilute tumescent infiltration offers a pharmacokinetically safer alternative to high-dose topical therapy. The review details systemic toxicity risk factors, recognition, and management, emphasizing that intravenous lipid emulsion therapy has transformed severe toxicity from an often-fatal event to a manageable emergency. Special considerations for pediatric and geriatric populations, drug interactions, and cumulative dosing across modalities are addressed. The overarching conclusion is that context-sensitive risk stratification which includes integrating vascular status, barrier integrity, and host pharmacokinetics combined with office preparedness including phentolamine and lipid emulsion, enables safe local anesthesia even in traditionally high-risk dermatologic scenarios.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.