Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 21 (4), 173-6

Topical Use of Local Anesthetics in Neonates

Affiliations

Topical Use of Local Anesthetics in Neonates

C M Essink-Tjebbes et al. Pharm World Sci.

Abstract

Introduction: Various local anesthetics as in lidocaine ointment, amethocaine cream and EMLA cream are used topically for minor invasive interventions, such as venipuncture, both in children and adults. Since neonates have a nervous system that, albeit immature, enables them to feel pain, analgesia for these procedures is also indicated. Several studies in neonates have been carried out to establish effectiveness and safety of topically applied local anesthetics. These studies are reviewed in order to assess effectiveness and safety.

Methods: A Medline search was made in order to review all studies on effectiveness and safety of topical use of local anesthetics in neonates. Effectivity or safety studies using local anesthetics for circumcision were rejected.

Results: Seven studies on effectiveness were found: Three studies examined lidocaine ointment and four examined EMLA cream. Effectiveness of lidocaine ointment was questionable in two studies and negative in one. Effectiveness of EMLA cream was positive in two studies and negative in the other two. Four studies were found on safety of EMLA cream. All studies indicated that use of EMLA cream was safe.

Discussion: The poor effectiveness found in the reviewed studies is possibly due to too long an application time, a lipophilic carrier used and difficulties in assessing pain. The time of application is often based upon studies in children. Since the skin of neonates acts more as a mucosa than as mature skin the local anesthetics are able to cross this barrier more rapidly. Also a high bloodflow in the heel enhances the uptake of the drug. The application time in neonates should therefore be reduced compared to children. The use of a lipophilic carrier should be avoided since a lipophilic carrier impedes the local anesthetic to be absorbed, leading to reduced effect. Various methods of pain assessment were being used. Since not all methods used are validated it is difficult to obtain an objective end point.

Conclusion and recommendation: The articles reviewed are non conclusive in their results of effective analgesia. Due to a lipophilic base form and a hydrophilic matrix EMLA cream is most effective. An application time of 30 minutes is recommended. In spite of the present precautions due to fear of methemoglobinemia, use of EMLA cream proved to be safe when used once a day. Since the clinical situation often requires more than one application a day, more research is needed to establish a safe and effective local anesthetic which can be applied topically several times a day in the neonate.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 2 PubMed Central articles

References

    1. Drugs. 1993 Jul;46(1):126-51 - PubMed

References

    1. Arch Pediatr. 1995 Oct;2(10):1021-2 - PubMed

References

    1. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1985 May;29(4):453-5 - PubMed

References

    1. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1995 Nov;39(8):1028-31 - PubMed

References

    1. Pediatr Clin North Am. 1989 Aug;36(4):781-94 - PubMed

References

    1. N Engl J Med. 1987 Nov 19;317(21):1321-9 - PubMed

References

    1. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1982 Apr 10;126(15):682-4 - PubMed

References

    1. Semin Perinatol. 1992 Feb;16(1):32-40 - PubMed

References

    1. Arch Pediatr. 1995 Nov;2(11):1041-6 - PubMed

References

    1. Pain. 1989 Oct;39(1):31-6 - PubMed

References

    1. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1995 Jan;72(1):F49-51 - PubMed

References

    1. Br J Anaesth. 1990 Jan;64(1):72-6 - PubMed

References

    1. Acta Paediatr. 1993 Sep;82(9):791 - PubMed

References

    1. Pain. 1996 Dec;68(2-3):431-4 - PubMed

References

    1. Acta Pharm Hung. 1994 Sep;64(5):167-70 - PubMed

References

    1. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1994 Sep;71(2):F122-4 - PubMed

References

    1. Anesthesiology. 1983 Jul;59(1):75-6 - PubMed

References

    1. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1983 Feb;11(1):23-6 - PubMed

References

    1. Arch Pediatr. 1995 Mar;2(3):291-2 - PubMed

References

    1. N Engl J Med. 1992 Jan 2;326(1):55-6 - PubMed

References

    1. Br J Anaesth. 1993 Sep;71(3):370-4 - PubMed

References

    1. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1983 Nov;56(5):480-2 - PubMed

References

    1. Anaesthesia. 1984 Oct;39(10):969-72 - PubMed

References

    1. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990 Apr;28(2):99-101 - PubMed

References

    1. Biol Neonate. 1986;49(2):74-80 - PubMed

References

    1. Br J Anaesth. 1990 Feb;64(2):173-7 - PubMed

References

    1. J Pediatr. 1995 Dec;127(6):1002-5 - PubMed

References

    1. Acta Derm Venereol. 1989;69(1):18-22 - PubMed

References

    1. Drugs. 1979 Sep;18(3):185-205 - PubMed

References

    1. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1994 May;70(3):F177-81 - PubMed

References

    1. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1983 Dec;27(6):510-2 - PubMed

References

    1. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1995 May;72(3):F203-4 - PubMed

References

    1. J Clin Pharm Ther. 1989 Apr;14(2):103-9 - PubMed

References

    1. J Pediatr. 1994 Feb;124(2):165-76 - PubMed

References

    1. J Pediatr. 1993 May;122(5 Pt 2):S14-20 - PubMed

References

    1. Paediatr Anaesth. 1996;6(2):107-10 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback