Injectable Diphenhydramine Used as Anaesthetic for Wide Local Excision With Flap Closure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lidocaine-allergic patients pose a challenge for cutaneous surgical procedures. We present a case of a successful wide local excision with flap closures on the face using topical tetracaine followed by infiltration with 1% diphenhydramine. CASE SUMMARY: An 84-year-old woman, with a lidocaine intolerance, presented to the Mohs surgery clinic for wide local excision of a nodular basal cell carcinoma on her right medial cheek. Successful anaesthesia was achieved using topical 4% tetracaine followed by intradermal and subcutaneous injection of 1% diphenhydramine. Haemostasis was achieved with both electrocautery and suture ligation. Sliding rotation flaps were closed using both deep and superficial sutures. Other than some mild discomfort and temporary hyperemia on injection, the patient tolerated the procedure well with no long-term complications. CONCLUSION: Diphenhydramine is a very useful alternative in lidocaine-intolerant patients for cutaneous procedures including punch and shave biopsies, cyst removals, small elliptical excisions, and wide local excisions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".