Assessment of the Effect of Perioperative Venous Lidocaine on the Intensity of Pain and IL-6 Concentration After Laparoscopic Gastroplasty

Comparison of the effects of perioperative intravenous infusions of esmolol and lidocaine on the quality of postoperative recovery in patients undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery: a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study

BACKGROUND

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion can improve the quality of recovery (QoR) in patients undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS), but the effect of esmolol on recovery has been rarely studied. The aim of this study to compare the effects of esmolol and lidocaine on the QoR in patients with FESS.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients were randomly divided into Group E: intravenous esmolol (0.5 mg/kg for 1 min, followed by 3.0 mg/kg/h); Group L: intravenous lidocaine (2.0 mg/ kg for 10 min, followed by 2 mg/kg/h). The quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) score was compared. Other parameters compared were the numeric rating pain scale (NRS), haemodynamic data, Surgical field conditions, intraoperative drug dosages, number of cases of remedial analgesia, time to awakening and incidence of postoperative sore throat (POST) as well as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

RESULTS

The mean difference in the QoR-15 score between Group E and Group L on postoperative day 1 (POD1) was - 1.37 (95% CI - 2.75 to 0.01; P < 0.001 for noninferiority), indicating the noninferiority of esmolol. Haemodynamic changes and intraoperative nitroglycerine dosages were significantly lower in Group E than in Group L (P < 0.05). The scores of surgical field quality (SSFQ) was higher in Group E than in Group L (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous infusion of esmolol is not inferior to lidocaine in the quality of postoperative recovery in patients with FESS, and is more advantageous in terms of the quality of the surgical field, attenuation of intraoperative haemodynamic fluctuations, and postoperative awakening.

Efficacy of nonopioid analgesics and adjuvants in multimodal analgesia for reducing postoperative opioid consumption and complications in obesity: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Managing postoperative pain in patients with obesity is challenging. Although multimodal analgesia has proved effective for pain relief, the specific impacts of different nonopioid i.v. analgesics and adjuvants on these patients are not well-defined. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, paracetamol, ketamine, α-2 adrenergic receptor agonists, lidocaine, magnesium, and oral gabapentinoids in reducing perioperative opioid consumption and, secondarily, in mitigating the occurrence of general and postoperative pulmonary complications (POPCs), nausea, vomiting, PACU length of stay (LOS), and hospital LOS among surgical patients with obesity.

METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched. Only English-language RCTs investigating the use of nonopioid analgesics and adjuvants in adult surgical patients with obesity were included. The quality of evidence and certainty were assessed using the RoB 2 tool and GRADE framework, respectively.

RESULTS

In total, 37 RCTs involving 3602 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Compared with placebo/no intervention or a comparator, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, lidocaine, magnesium, and gabapentin significantly reduced postoperative opioid consumption after surgery. Ketamine/esketamine also significantly reduced POPCs. Ibuprofen, dexmedetomidine, and lidocaine significantly reduced postoperative nausea, whereas dexmedetomidine, either alone or combined with pregabalin, and lidocaine reduced postoperative vomiting. Dexmedetomidine significantly reduced PACU LOS, whereas both paracetamol and lidocaine reduced hospital LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous nonopioid analgesics and adjuvants are crucial in multimodal anaesthesia, reducing opioid consumption and enhancing postoperative care in adult surgical patients with obesity.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

CRD42023399373 (PROSPERO).

Effects of Intravenous Lidocaine on Quality of Recovery After Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of pre and intraoperative lidocaine infusion on short-term recovery quality after laparoscopic bariatric surgeries. In the search across MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases, we considered randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous lidocaine vs placebo (saline) for patients with obesity undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Seven studies (640 patients) were included. The lidocaine group had a significantly higher recovery quality score, a lower morphine consumption, and a notably reduced rate of nausea and vomiting compared with the placebo group. Additionally, Lidocaine infusion was associated with a shorter hospital stay, while no significant difference was observed in the time to bowel function recovery between both groups. In conclusion, lidocaine infusion before and during laparoscopic bariatric surgery contributes to an enhanced quality of recovery.

Effects of intravenous lidocaine on postoperative pain and gastrointestinal function recovery following gastrointestinal surgery: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The full extent of intravenous lidocaine's effectiveness in alleviating postoperative pain and enhancing gastrointestinal function recovery remains uncertain.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted an exhaustive search of databases to identify randomized controlled trials that compared intravenous lidocaine infusion's efficacy to that of a placebo or routine care in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. The primary outcome measure was resting pain scores 24 h postoperatively. We utilized a random-effects model based on the intention-to-treat principle for the overall results.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

This study included twenty-four trials with 1533 patients. Intravenous lidocaine significantly reduced resting pain scores 24 h after gastrointestinal surgery (twenty trials, SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.09 to -0.24, P=0.002, I2 = 90%). This finding was consistent in subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses. The benefit was also observed at other resting and moving time points (1, 2, 4, and 12 h) postoperatively. Intravenous lidocaine significantly decreased opioid consumption within 24 h after surgery (eleven trials, SMD: -1.19; 95% CI: -1.99 to -0.39; P=0.003). Intravenous lidocaine also shortened the time to bowel sound (MD: -8.51; 95% CI: -14.59 to -2.44; P=0.006), time to first flatus (MD: -6.00; 95% CI: -9.87 to -2.13; P=0.002), and time to first defecation (MD: -9.77; 95% CI: -17.19 to -2.36; P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine can alleviate acute pain and expedite gastrointestinal function recovery in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to substantial heterogeneity. Further large-scale studies are necessary to validate these findings.

Non-Opioid Analgesics and Adjuvants after Surgery in Adults with Obesity: Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background/Objectives: Managing postoperative pain in patients with obesity is challenging. Although using a combination of pain relief methods is recommended for these patients, the true effectiveness of various intravenous non-opioid analgesics and adjuvants in multimodal anesthesia needs to be better defined. Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, ketamine, α-2 agonists, lidocaine, magnesium, and oral gabapentinoids in adult surgical patients with obesity. The analysis aimed to compare these treatments to a placebo/no treatment or alternative analgesics, with a primary focus on postoperative pain and secondary endpoints including rescue analgesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and recovery quality. English-language randomized controlled trials across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and EMBASE were considered. Quality and evidence certainty were assessed with the RoB 2 tool and GRADE, and data was analyzed with R software. Results: NSAIDs, along with acetaminophen, lidocaine, α-2 agonists, ketamine, and oral gabapentinoids, effectively reduce early postoperative pain. NSAIDs, particularly ibuprofen, as well as acetaminophen, ketamine, and lidocaine, also show benefits in later postoperative stages. Intravenous non-opioid analgesics and adjuvants show some degree of benefit in reducing PONV and the need for rescue analgesic therapy when using α-2 agonists alone or combined with oral gabapentinoids, notably decreasing the likelihood of PONV. Ketamine, lidocaine, and α-2 agonists are shown to enhance postoperative recovery and care quality. Conclusions: Intravenous non-opioid analgesics and adjuvants are valuable in multimodal anesthesia for pain management in adult surgical patients suffering from obesity.

Systemic Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Intravenous Lidocaine in Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

There has recently been increasing evidence that the use of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion possesses analgesic, opioid-sparing and anti-inflammatory effects in surgical patients. Although opioid-sparing and analgesic properties have been strongly supported, the anti-inflammatory features are not well established in elective surgery. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to examine the effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on postoperative anti-inflammatory status in patients undergoing elective surgery. A search strategy was created to identify suitable randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Clinicaltrials.gov databases until January 2023. RCTs that evaluated the effect of intravenous lidocaine infusion, compared with placebo, on adult patients who underwent elective surgery, in inflammatory markers response were included. Exclusion criteria consisted of paediatric patients, animal studies, non-RCT methodology, intervention without intravenous lidocaine, inadequate control group, duplicated samples, ongoing studies and lack of any relevant clinical outcome measures. The following inflammatory markers-interleukin (IL)-6, tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, IL-1RA, IL-8, IL-10, C-reactive protein (CRP), IL-1, IL-1β, interferon (IFN)-γ, cortisol, IL-4, IL-17, high-mobility group protein B1 (HMGB1) and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β-were evaluated as outcomes in this review. A total of 21 studies, including 1254 patients, were identified. Intravenous lidocaine infusion significantly reduced the change from IL-6 baseline levels at the end of surgery compared to a placebo (standardised mean difference [SMD]: -0.647, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.034 to -0.260). Usage of lidocaine was associated with a significant reduction in other postoperative pro-inflammatory markers, such as TNF-α, IL-1RA, IL-8, IL-17, HMGB-1 and CRP. There was no significant difference in other markers, such as IL-10, IL-1β, IL-1, IFN-γ, IL-4, TGF-β and cortisol. This systematic review and meta-analysis provide support for the administration of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion as an anti-inflammatory strategy in elective surgery.

Effect of Systemic Lidocaine on Postoperative Early Recovery Quality in Patients Undergoing Supratentorial Tumor Resection

Purpose

Lidocaine has been gradually used in general anesthesia. This study was designed to investigate the effect of systemic lidocaine on postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) in patients undergoing supratentorial tumor resection, and to explore its brain-injury alleviation effect in neurosurgical anesthesia.

Patients and Methods

Sixty adult patients undergoing elective supratentorial tumor resection. Patients were randomly assigned either to receive lidocaine (Group L: 1.5 mg/kg bolus completed 10 min before anesthesia induction followed by an infusion at 2.0 mg/kg/h) or to receive normal saline (Group C: received volume-matched normal saline at the same infusion rate). Primary outcome measures were Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) scores on postoperative day (POD) 1 and 2. Plasma concentrations of S100B protein (S100B), neuron specific enolase (NSE), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) before anesthesia induction and at the end of surgery were assessed. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores were assessed at 1, 2, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h after surgery. Perioperative parameters and adverse events were also recorded.

Results

Patients between two groups had comparable baseline characteristics. Global QoR-40 scores on POD 1 and POD 2 were significantly higher (P <0.001) in group L (165.5±3.8 vs 173.7±4.7) than those in group C (155.6±4.0 vs 163.2±4.5); and scores of physical comfort, emotional state, and pain in group L were superior to those in group C (P <0.05). In group L, patients possessed lower plasma concentration of pro-inflammatory factors (IL-6, TNF-α) and brain injury-related factors (S100B, NSE) (P <0.05), consumed less remifentanil and propofol, and experienced lower pain intensity. Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated age and pain were correlated with postperative recovery quality.

Conclusion

Systemic lidocaine improved early recovery quality after supratentorial tumor resection with general anesthesia, and had certain brain-injury alleviation effects. These benefits may be attributed to the inflammation-alleviating and analgesic properties of lidocaine.

Efficacy of Perioperative Continuous Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion for 72 Hours on Postoperative Pain and Recovery in Patients Undergoing Hepatectomy: Study Protocol for a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Many patients develop severe and persistent pain after hepatectomy delaying postoperative rehabilitation. Studies have suggested that intravenous lidocaine infusion relieved postoperative pain and improved overall postoperative outcomes. However, its efficacy on hepatectomy is still masked, due to the postoperative metabolic change of lidocaine by the liver. We hypothesized that intravenous lidocaine infusion in the perioperative period would lead to postoperative pain reduction and improve the overall patient experience.

Study Design and Methods

In this prospective double-blind, randomized controlled design trial, 260 adults scheduled for hepatectomy will be allocated to the lidocaine and the placebo groups. The lidocaine group will be administered lidocaine intravenously during intraoperative period and 72 postoperative hours; the placebo group will be administered normal saline at the same volume, infusion rate, and timing. The primary outcome is the incidence of moderate-severe pain (numeric rating scale ≥4) during movement at 24 hours after surgery. The secondary outcomes include the incidence of moderate-severe pain at 24 hours after surgery at rest, the incidence of moderate-severe pain at 48 and 72 hours after surgery at rest and during movement, the cumulative morphine consumption at 24, 48 and 72 hours postoperatively, bowel function recovery, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications, the length of hospital stay, levels of inflammatory factors and patient satisfaction scores.

Discussion

This is the first prospective trial to shed light on the efficacy of intraoperative period and 72 postoperative hours intravenous lidocaine on postoperative pain and recovery after hepatectomy. The findings will provide a new strategy of perioperative pain management for hepatectomy.

Dexmedetomidine vs. lidocaine for postoperative analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing craniotomy: a protocol for a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial

Background

Postoperative pain is a common problem that occurs in pediatric patients following neurosurgery which may lead to severe complications. Dexmedetomidine is a commonly used adjuvant medicine in craniotomy owing to its sedative, amnestic, analgesic, and neuroprotective properties. Besides, studies suggest that lidocaine has similar effects on sedation, analgesia, and neuroprotection. Both two adjuvants can reduce postoperative pain after neurosurgery in adults. However, it is still unknown whether dexmedetomidine or lidocaine can reduce postoperative pain in children undergoing craniotomy, and if yes, which is a better medicine choice. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effect of dexmedetomidine vs. lidocaine on postoperative pain in pediatric patients after craniotomy.

Methods/design

We will perform a randomized (1:1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center trial. Children aged 1–12 years scheduled for craniotomy will be eligible for inclusion. The 255 recruited participants will be stratified by age in two strata (1–6 years and 7–12 years), and then each stratum will be equally randomized to three groups: group D (infusion of dexmedetomidine [intervention group]), group L (infusion of lidocaine [intervention group]), and group C (infusion of normal saline [control group]). Patients will be followed up at 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, 24 h, and 48 h after surgery. The primary outcome will be total sufentanil consumption within 24 h after surgery.

Discussion

In this clinical trial, we expect to clarify and compare the postoperative analgesic effect of dexmedetomidine vs. lidocaine infusion on pediatric patients undergoing craniotomy. We believe that the results of this trial will provide more choices for postoperative analgesia for the pediatric population.

Trial registration

Chinese ClinicalTrials.gov ChiCTR1800019411. Registered on 10 November 2018

Efficacy of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine for postoperative analgesia following bariatric surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND

The impact of intravenous lidocaine in adults undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgeries (LBS) remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed at investigating the effect of intravenous lidocaine on postoperative opioid consumption and recovery following LBS.

SETTING

Meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of intravenous lidocaine compared to placebo only prior to May 2021. The primary outcome was 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption, while secondary outcomes included pain score, quality of recovery (QOR)-40 score, length of hospital stay (LOS), and postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV).

RESULTS

Seven trials (496 participants) were included. Intraoperative intravenous lidocaine significantly reduced 24-hour equivalent morphine consumption (mean difference [MD]: -11.97 mg; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -23.12 to -.83), pain score at 1 to 3 hours (MD: -.77; 95% CI: -1.5 to -.04), and LOS (MD: -8.93 hr; 95% CI: -13.41 to -4.44) without positive impact on 24-hour pain score and PONV. There was also an increase in time to first opioid requirement (MD: 20.23 min; 95% CI: 11.76-28.7) and QOR-40 score (MD: 24.38; 95% CI: 5.57-43.18). However, sensitivity analysis demonstrated evidence supporting the beneficial effect of lidocaine only for time to first opioid requirement and QOR-40. The associations of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine with reductions in morphine consumption, pain score at 1 to 3 hours, and LOS after LBS were also weak.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative intravenous lidocaine during LBS prolonged time to first opioid requirement and improved quality of recovery postoperatively without 24-hour pain or nausea/vomiting benefits. Due to the small number of trials, larger studies are warranted to verify our findings.

Effects of Systemic Lidocaine on Postoperative Recovery Quality and Immune Function in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Radical Gastrectomy

Objective

This study aimed to explore the effects of lidocaine on postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) and immune function in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy.

Methods

In total, 135 patients were enrolled and were equally randomized to receive low-dose lidocaine (Group LL: 1.5 mg/kg bolus followed by an infusion at 1.0 mg/kg/hour) or high-dose lidocaine (Group HL: 1.5 mg/kg bolus followed by an infusion at 2.0 mg/kg/hour) or Controls (Group C: received a volume-matched normal saline at the same rate). The primary outcome was a QoR-40 score on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes were a QoR-40 score on POD 3, levels of inflammatory factors (IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α) and CD4⁺T cells, CD8⁺T cells proportions, and CD4⁺/CD8⁺ cell ratios and postoperative recovery of bowel function.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in patient characteristics at baseline. The total QoR-40 scores on POD 1 in Group HL (171.4±3.89) were higher than those in Group LL (166.20±4.05) and in Group C (163.40±4.38) (adjusted P<0.001). Differences in the dimension scores of QoR-40 for pain, physical comfort, and emotional state were significant across the three groups. Lidocaine administration significantly reduced the release of IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, and attenuated immune changes induced by trauma. Kaplan–Meier curves showed that the median time to the first exhaust and defecation were shorter in the Group HL than in Groups LL and C (1.55 days vs 2.4 days vs 2.6 days, log rank P<0.0001; and 2.86 days vs 3.22 days vs 3.46 days, log rank P=0.002, respectively). Additionally, patients in lidocaine groups required less remifentanil consumption and experienced lower pain intensity, compared with the control group.

Conclusion

Systemic lidocaine improved postoperative recovery, alleviated inflammation and immunosuppression, and accelerated the return of bowel function, and is thus, worthy of clinical application.

Clinical Trials Registration

ChiCTR2000028934.