NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/sci/med/14535

Text File | 1992-07-26 | 1.9 KB | 50 lines

Newsgroups: sci.med
Path: sparky!uunet!nwnexus!seanews!billmcc
From: [e-mail] (Bill McCormick)
Subject: Anesthesia for plantar wart removal
Organization: SEANEWS - Seattle Public Access News & Mail
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 06:30:24 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 51

I just had several plantar warts removed and it was an excruciating
experience.

The anesthetic used was 1% lidocaine w/epinephrine directly
infiltrated.  Injection into the plantar surface was incredibly
painful itself, but then as the surgical removal continued
it was apparent that the anesthesia was not completely effective --
causing much more pain.

I have a normal pain threshold, not really sensitive but not
macho-man tolerant, and this was really, really painful.

Now I look in the medical library and I find the recent
articles on plantar warts all seem to recommend nerve
block anesthesia for such procedures, specifically anesthesia
of the posterior tibial nerve.  As one article put it,
"the posterior tibial nerve block is most commonly used
because injection into the plantar skin is so painful
and procedures on that surface are required more often."

So now my question to the net-experts before my followup
visit.  Is there any common reason my physician did not
use the nerve-block anesthesia?  Is it common to just use
direct infiltration when surgically removing plantar
warts?  Is the nerve-block injection just as painful as
each plantar injection?  Why is injection into the
plantar skin so much more painful than, say, into the
hand or even face?

And a last question -- why is local anesthesia so painful
in general? I read that it is directly caused by the
acidic nature of the anesthetic -- but why does the anesthetic
have to be so acidic?  Is it not possible to buffer it?

Thanks for any info.

Bill
--
SEANEWS        [] Seattle News + Mail []         [phone]
[e-mail]                          Public Access