Peribulbar versus Retrobulbar Anesthesia for Ophthalmic Surgery: An Anatomical Comparison of Extraconal and Intraconal Injections

BackgroundPeribulbar and retrobulbar anesthesia have long been opposed on the basis of the existence of an intermuscular membrane, which is supposed to separate the intraconal from the extraconal spaces in a water-tight fashion. A local anesthetic injected outside the cone should spread through this septum to reach the nerves to be blocked. The existence of this septum is questioned. The aim of this study was to compare the spread of a colored latex dye injected intraconally or extraconally to simulate both retrobulbar and peribulbar anesthesia. MethodsThe authors used 10 heads from human cadavers. For each head, one eye was injected intraconally, and the other eye was injected extraconally. The heads were then frozen and sectioned into thin slices following various planes. They were then photographed and observed. ResultsThere was no evidence of the existence of an intermuscular septum separating the intraconal and extraconal spaces. Those two spaces appeared to be part of a common spreading space, the corpus adiposum of the orbit. ConclusionsThese results are in accord with the fact that clinical studies were not able to clearly demonstrate that retrobulbar anesthesia is more efficient than peribulbar anesthesia. On the basis of a similar clinical efficacy of the two techniques as a result of similar spreading of the local anesthetic injected, and a potentially higher risk of introducing the needle into the muscular cone, the authors recommend replacing retrobulbar anesthesia with peribulbar anesthesia.