Effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on postoperative recovery following laparoscopic Cholecystectomy-A randomized controlled trial

Intravenous lidocaine decreased the incidence of SRAEs for ERCP procedures in elderly frailty patients, a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Elderly frailty patients are at particular risk of sedation-related adverse events (SRAEs) during sedation. This study aimed to assess whether intravenous lidocaine could reduce the incidence of SRAEs in elderly frailty patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS

A total of 210 elderly frailty patients scheduled for ERCP were randomly divided into two groups: lidocaine and control. Patients in the lidocaine group received intravenous lidocaine (1.0 mg/kg) before anesthesia induction, followed by continuous intravenous infusion (2.0 mg/kg/h) during ERCP. The control group received an equal volume of saline solution. The primary endpoint was the composite incidence of SRAEs during ERCP. Secondary endpoints were propofol consumption, VAS score, endoscopists' and patients' satisfaction scores and lidocaine-related adverse events and so on.

RESULTS

The composite incidence of SRAEs in the lidocaine group was significantly lower than in the control group (41.05% vs. 21.86%, p < 0.05). The propofol requirement (436.11 ± 118.90, 388.54 ± 149.65. p < 0.001) and VAS score of patients (3.02 ± 1.07, 2.54 ± 1.10. p < 0.05) in the lidocaine group were significantly lower than those in the control group. The endoscopists' satisfaction scores (7.77 ± 1.12, 8.23 ± 1.10. p < 0.05) and patients' satisfaction scores (8.53 ± 0.95, 8.98 ± 0.86. p < 0.05) in lidocaine group were significantly higher than those in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous lidocaine can significantly decrease the incidence of SRAEs for ERCP procedures in elderly frailty patients, with no increase in lidocaine or other related adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Trial ID: ChiCTR2300067796, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=185763 ).

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion improves postoperative analgesia after hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of intravenous lidocaine in reducing acute pain after hysterectomy remains uncertain. The authors conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the impact of intravenous lidocaine on posthysterectomy recovery.

METHODS

This study was completed based on the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), and Embase up to 27 July 2023. The authors identified RCTs involving hysterectomy patients comparing lidocaine to a placebo. Outcome measures included postoperative pain scores at rest and during movement, opioid consumption, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), improvements in functional gastrointestinal recovery, and Quality of Recovery scores.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 352 patients who received intravenous lidocaine and 354 controls. The analysis revealed that intravenous lidocaine significantly reduced postoperative pain scores at rest at 2, 6, 8, and 24 h following hysterectomy, as well as postoperative opioid consumption within 24 h and PONV rates. Furthermore, no observed benefit was noted in shortening the time to first flatus with intravenous lidocaine administration posthysterectomy.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous lidocaine administration effectively reduces acute postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and PONV rates following hysterectomy. Lidocaine serves as an opioid-sparing agent, reducing the morphine equivalent dose while maintaining a similar degree of postoperative pain.

Pain management after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) recommendations

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be associated with significant postoperative pain that is difficult to treat. We aimed to evaluate the available literature and develop updated recommendations for optimal pain management after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A systematic review was performed using the procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) methodology. Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published in the English language from August 2017 to December 2022 assessing postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy using analgesic, anaesthetic or surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Databases. From 589 full text articles, 157 randomised controlled trials and 31 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Paracetamol combined with NSAIDs or cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors should be given either pre-operatively or intra-operatively, unless contraindicated. In addition, intra-operative intravenous (i.v.) dexamethasone, port-site wound infiltration or intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation are recommended, with opioids used for rescue analgesia. As a second-line regional technique, the erector spinae plane block or transversus abdominis plane block may be reserved for patients with a heightened risk of postoperative pain. Three-port laparoscopy, a low-pressure pneumoperitoneum, umbilical port extraction, active aspiration of the pneumoperitoneum and saline irrigation are recommended technical aspects of the operative procedure. The following interventions are not recommended due to limited or no evidence on improved pain scores: single port or mini-port techniques, routine drainage, low flow insufflation, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), infra-umbilical incision, i.v. clonidine, nefopam and regional techniques such as quadratus lumborum block or rectus sheath block. Several interventions provided better pain scores but are not recommended due to risk of side effects: spinal or epidural anaesthesia, gabapentinoids, i.v. lidocaine, i.v. ketamine and i.v. dexmedetomidine.

Comparison of hemodynamic responses to nasal intubation in cancer patients receiving opioid-free general anesthesia versus standard regimen

Background and Aims

Nasotracheal intubation evokes greater hemodynamic responses than oral intubation. We compared the heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) responses following nasal intubation during opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) using intravenous lignocaine versus standard regimen using morphine in cancer patients undergoing tumor resection.

Material and Methods

This randomized, double-blinded study was conducted in 84 adults. Group A received lidocaine bolus 1.5 mg/kg over 10 min followed by infusion of 1 mg/kg/h. Group B received morphine 0.2mg/kg bolus over 10 min followed by infusion of 2mg/h. Protocols for induction and intubation were similar.

Results

Mean HR and MAP at preinduction, immediately after induction, and at 1, 3, and 5 min after intubation were comparable in groups A and B. Intragroup comparison of preinduction HR with subsequent values in group A showed that the HR values at 1,3, and 5 min after intubation were significantly higher than the preinduction value. HR after induction was comparable. Intragroup analysis in group B showed that preinduction HR was comparable with HR after induction and at 3 and 5 min after intubation. HR at 1 min was significantly higher. Intragroup analysis in group A showed that the MAP values were significantly lower than the preinduction value after induction and at 1,3, and 5 min after intubation. In group B, MAP was significantly lower than the preinduction value after induction and at 3 and 5 min after intubation, with the value being comparable at 1 min.

Conclusion

OFA with lignocaine bolus followed by infusion, as well as morphine did not attenuate the HR responses to nasal intubation in cancer patients. However, both techniques effectively blunted the MAP response.

Systemic lidocaine versus erector spinae plane block for improving quality of recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare intravenous lidocaine, ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB), and placebo on the quality of recovery and analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

DESIGN

A prospective, triple-arm, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial.

SETTING

A single tertiary academic medical center.

PATIENTS

126 adults aged 18-65 years undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups: intravenous lidocaine infusion (1.5 mg/kg bolus followed by 2 mg/kg/h) plus bilateral ESPB with saline (25 mL per side); bilateral ESPB with 0.25% ropivacaine (25 ml per side) plus placebo infusion; or bilateral ESPB with saline (25 ml per side) plus placebo infusion.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the 24-h postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score. The non-inferiority of lidocaine versus ESPB was assessed with a margin of -6 points and 97.5% confidence interval (CI). Secondary outcomes included 24-h area under the curve (AUC) for pain scores, morphine consumption, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

124 patients completed the study. Median (IQR) 24-h QoR-15 scores were 123 (117-127) for lidocaine, 124 (119-126) for ESPB, and 112 (108-117) for placebo. Lidocaine was non-inferior to ESPB (median difference  -1, 97.5% CI: -4 to ∞). Both lidocaine (median difference 9, 95% CI: 6-12, P < 0.001) and ESPB (median difference 10, 95% CI: 7-13, P < 0.001) were superior to placebo. AUC for pain scores and morphine use were lower with lidocaine and ESPB versus placebo (P < 0.001 for all), with no significant differences between lidocaine and ESPB. One ESPB patient reported a transient metallic taste; no other block-related complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, intravenous lidocaine provides a non-inferior quality of recovery compared to ESPB without requiring specialized regional anesthesia procedures. Lidocaine may offer a practical and accessible alternative within multimodal analgesia pathways.

The role of intravenous lidocaine infusion in enhanced recovery after laparoscopic renal surgeries: A randomized control trial

Background and Aims

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been applied in various laparoscopic procedures. Intravenous lidocaine (IVL) infusion is used for laparoscopic procedures as a part of ERAS protocols. The study aimed to evaluate the role of IVL infusion in enhanced bowel recovery after laparoscopic renal surgeries.

Material and Methods

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-control trial was conducted on 80 patients (with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II) who presented for laparoscopic renal surgeries under general anesthesia. The study period was from Oct 2018 to Sept 2019. By computer-generated codes, patients were randomly divided into two groups: L (lidocaine) and C (control). Group L received an intravenous (IV) bolus (1.5 mg/kg) of 2% lidocaine over 2 min, followed by an IV lidocaine infusion at the rate of 1.5 mg/kg/h until skin closure. Group C received the same volume of bolus followed by normal saline infusion. Patients were monitored for bowel functions, total hospital stay, and total analgesic consumption. Student's t-test and Chi-square test were used for quantitative data and occurrence of events, respectively. P <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

First bowel sound, flatus, and defecation occurred in 16.4 ± 2.50, 26.7 ± 9.02, and 39.1 ± 6.31 h, respectively, in group L and 18.2 ± 2.90, 32.3 ± 3.11, and 43.3 ± 4.22 h, respectively, in group C (P = 0.006, 0.001, and 0.01, respectively). Total hospital stay was 4.0 ± 0.74 and 5.3±0.0.91 days in groups L and C, respectively (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The present study concluded that IVL could enhance the bowel recovery and reduce total hospital stay after laparoscopic renal surgeries.

The use of lidocaine infusion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

Being one of the most common abdominal surgical procedures, numerous techniques have been adapted to decrease post-operative pain post cholecystectomy. However, the efficacy of intravenous (IV) lidocaine in managing post operative pain after LC is still controversial, according to many recent studies. This study aims to detect the effectiveness of IV lidocaine compared to other medications in managing post-operative pain. PubMed, Scopes, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies from inception to June 2023, and a systematic review and meta-analysis was done. According to eligibility criteria, 14 studies (898 patients) were included in our study. The pooled results of the included studies showed that the pain score after 6, 12 and 24 h after the surgery was significantly lower in those who received IV lidocaine as a painkiller (Visual Analogue Scale [VAS] 6H, mean difference [MD] = -1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.20, -0.20, P = 0.02; I2 = 98%, VAS 12H, MD = -0.90, 95% CI = -1.52, -0.29, P = 0.004; I2 = 96% and VAS 24H, MD = -0.86, 95% CI = -1.48, -0.24, P = 0.007; I2 = 92%). In addition, IV lidocaine is associated with a significant decrease in the opioid requirement after the surgery (opioid requirements, MD = -29.53, 95% CI = -55.41, -3.66, P = 0.03; I2 = 98%). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of nausea and vomiting after the surgery between the two groups (nausea and vomiting, relative risk = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.57, 1.45, P = 0.69; I2 = 50%). Lidocaine infusion in LC is associated with a significant decrease in post operative pain and in opioid requirements after the surgery.

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on the ED50 of propofol induction dose in elderly patients undergoing painless gastroscopy: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled study

BACKGROUND

Intravenous lidocaine could be a potential alternative adjuvant to propofol-based sedation for gastroscopy in elderly patients. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of intravenous lidocaine on the median effective dose (ED50) of propofol induction dose in elderly patients undergoing painless gastroscopy.

METHODS

The study included 70 patients aged ≥ 60 years undergoing painless gastroscopy with 64 randomly assigned to either group L (2% lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg, n = 31) or group N (equal volume normal saline, n = 33). All patients received propofol induction following 0.1 μg/kg intravenous sufentanil. The Dixon "up-and-down" sequential method was used, with a 1.5 mg/kg initial induction dose of propofol followed by a 0.1 mg/kg sequential variable dose. The primary endpoint was the ED50 of the propofol induction dose. The total propofol dose, recovery time, adverse events, and local anesthetic intoxication reactions were also recorded.

RESULTS

The ED50 of propofol induction dose was 0.670 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.216-0.827) mg/kg in group L and 1.118 (95% CI 0.803-1.232) mg/kg in group N. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). The incidence of hypotension and propofol injection pain were lower in group L than in group N (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the orientation recovery time in group L was shorter compared to group N (p < 0.05). None of the participants in group L observed local anesthetic intoxication reactions after receiving lidocaine.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of intravenous lidocaine to elderly patients undergoing painless gastroscopy resulted in a significant 40% reduction in the ED50 of propofol induction dose, which may be related to the decreased incidence of hypotension and injection pain, as well as the improved post-gastroscopy orientation recovery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR, ChiCTR2200065530. Registered on 08 November 2022.

Effect of systemic lidocaine on postoperative quality of recovery, the gastrointestinal function, inflammatory cytokines of lumbar spinal stenosis surgery: a randomized trial

Surgery is one of the most frequent and effective intervention strategies for lumbar spinal stenosis, however, one-third of patients are not satisfied with postoperative outcomes. It is not clear whether perioperative systemic lidocaine could accelerate the early postoperative quality of recovery in patients undergoing lumbar spinal stenosis surgery. 66 patients were enrolled in this trial. Lidocaine or placebo was administered at a loading dose of 1.5 mg/kg for 10 min and then infused at 2.0 mg/kg/hour till the end of surgery. Continued infusion by postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with a dose of 40 mg/hour. The primary outcome was the quality of recovery. Secondary outcomes included the time of the patient's first flatus, catheter removal time, underground time from the end of the surgery, pain score, levels of inflammatory factors (IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), sufentanil rescues, patients' satisfaction scores, and complications of lidocaine. Eventually, 56 patients were in the final analysis with similar age, Body Mass Index (BMI), duration of surgery and anesthesia, and median QoR-15 score (a development and Psychometric Evaluation of a Postoperative Quality of Recovery Score). The difference in median QoR-15 score in placebo versus lidocaine patients was statistically significant (IQR, 106 (104-108) versus 114 (108.25-119.25), P < 0.001). The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score at the 12th hour, median sufentanil rescue consumption, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) of patients treatment with lidocaine were lower. Nevertheless, patients given lidocaine had high satisfaction scores. Suggesting that lidocaine enhanced the postoperative quality of recovery, met early postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery, provided superior pain relief, lessened inflammatory cytokines, etc., indicating it may be a useful intervention to aid recovery following lumbar spinal stenosis surgery.

Intravenous lidocaine improves postoperative cognition in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a randomized, double-blind, controlled study

BACKGROUND

The risk of postoperative cognitive dysfunction(POCD) in laparoscopic surgery should not be overlooked. Intravenous lidocaine can reduce perioperative inflammatory response in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery, while the effect of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine on postoperative cognitive function in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery has not been well studied. We investigated whether intraoperative lidocaine improves postoperative cognitive function after laparoscopic radical resection for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, randomized double blinded controlled trial to investigate the effect of intravenous lidocaine on rapid postoperative recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous lidocaine or saline. The primary outcome was cognitive dysfunction defined by a decrease from pre- to postoperative ≥ 2 of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, at the 3rd and the 7th postoperative days. Secondary outcomes were the MMSE raw score and parameters of the patients' postoperative recovery such as agitation and length of stay in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU), length of hospital stay, markers of inflammation (white blood cell count and CRP), and incidence of complications.

RESULTS

Seventy-three patients in the lidocaine group and 77 patients in the control group completed the trial. The rate of cognitive dysfunction was lower in the lidocaine group than that in the control group, both at the 3rd (18.57% vs. 63.64% for each group respectively; RR = 0.26, 95%CI = 0.19-0.32; p < 0.0001) and at the 7th postoperative day (12.33% vs. 53.25% for each group respectively; RR = 0.28, 95%CI = 0.22-0.35; P < 0.001). The postoperative MMSE scores were also higher in the lidocaine group than in the control group both at the 3rd (median 25 vs. 24 respectively) and at the 7th postoperative day (26 vs. 24 respectively). Also, patients in the lidocaine group displayed a lower white blood cell count than the control group at the 1st postoperative day (8.5 ± 2.7 vs. 10.4 ± 3.3; p < 0. 001). No differences were evidenced for the other secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative intravenous lidocaine can significantly improve postoperative cognitive function in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (16/1/2022, registration number: ChiCTR2200055683).

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.

Efficacy of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on postoperative opioid consumption after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

We designed this study to evaluate the impact of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on postoperative opioid consumption after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

In total, 98 patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included and randomized. In the experimental group, intravenous lidocaine (bolus 1.5 mg/kg and continuous infusion 2 mg/kg/h) was administered intraoperatively additionally to the standard analgesia, whereas the control group received a matching placebo. Blinding existed at the level of both the patient and the investigator.

RESULTS

Our study failed to confirm any benefit in opioid consumption, during the postoperative period. Lidocaine resulted to reduced intraoperative systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressure. Lidocaine administration did not change postoperative pain scores or the incidence of shoulder pain, at any time endpoint. Moreover, we did not identify any difference in terms of postoperative sedation levels and nausea rates.

CONCLUSION

Overall, lidocaine did not have any effect on postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

The effect of lidocaine intraoperative infusion on quality of postoperative sleep in patients undergoing thyroidectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The incidence of thyroid nodules has increased significantly in recent years, and surgical removal is a common treatment. Postoperative sleep disturbance is still a serious problem in the current surgical environment. In this study, we explored whether intraoperative lidocaine infusion could improve the quality of sleep over 7 days and 30 days after surgery and postoperative recovery for patients undergoing thyroid surgery.

METHODS

Seventy patients who underwent thyroid surgery from October 2020 to June 2021 were randomly assigned to the lidocaine or the normal saline group, 35 cases in each group. Patients enrolled in this study were randomized to receive either system lidocaine (a bolus of 1.5 mg·kg^- 1, followed by an infusion of 2 mg·kg^- 1·h^- 1 until the end of the surgical procedure) or identical volumes and rates of normal saline. The primary endpoint was the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) scores. Secondary endpoints included intraoperative remifentanil consumption, whether there was a cough within 5 min after extubation and the cough scores, postoperative pain scores, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

RESULTS

Totally seventy cases were enrolled and eventually sixty-eight cases were analyzed. PSQI scores did not change significantly over time (F = 2.799, P = 0.069); also, there was no significant difference in PSQI scores between two groups in the entire 30 days follow-up period (F = 0.174, P = 0.678). Further, there was no interaction between the time points and the intervention (F = 0.649, P = 0.513). Similarly, intraoperative remifentanil consumption, the incidence of cough and postoperative pain scores, were comparable between the two groups (all P > 0.05); while patients in the lidocaine group showed significantly lower cough scores (P = 0.042) and lower incidence of PONV (P = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic lidocaine infusion might not improve the sleep quality and reduce postoperative pain over 7 days or 30 days after the operation of patients who underwent thyroid surgery, but it can reduce postoperative complications and improve the quality of recovery. Furthermore, sleep quality of patients wasn't impaired significantly in the entire 30 days follow-up period after thyroid surgery compared with baseline values.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( http://www.chictr.org.cn , identifier: ChiCTR2000039764, date: 08/11/2020).

Analgesic Effects and Adverse Reactions of Lidocaine for Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia on Patients Undergoing Open Hepatectomy: A Retrospective Analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of lidocaine for patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) in patients who underwent open hepatectomy.

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis.

METHODS

A total of 281 patients who underwent open hepatectomy from July 2018 to December 2018 were included. All patients were assigned into two groups: the lidocaine group (PCIA consisted of lidocaine, sufentanil, tramadol and granisetron) and the control group (PCIA consisted of sufentanil, tramadol and granisetron). The postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) and complications (including respiratory depression, hypotension, nausea and vomiting, pruritus, numbness of the corners of the mouth, dizziness) between the groups were compared.

FINDINGS

There were no significant differences between the characteristics, duration of surgery and anesthesia, and recovery of postoperative activity between the two groups. In the first 3 days after the operation, the postoperative VAS score of the lidocaine group was lower than that of the control group at resting state, while after activity, the postoperative VAS contrast results were completely opposite. In particularly, the resting state at 48 hours (h) (1.05 ± 1.25 vs 1.57 ± 1.54) after surgery and the activity state at 72 h (3.02 ± 1.51 vs 2.2 ± 1.66) after surgery (P < 0.05). The incidence of mouth numbness and dizziness were significantly increased in the lidocaine group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The addition of lidocaine in PCIA was not beneficial to improve the pain during activities and increased the incidence of perioral numbness and dizziness.

Intravenous lidocaine simultaneously infused with sufentanil to accelerate gastrointestinal function recovery in patients after thoracolumbar surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled study

PURPOSE

Postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction is one of the common complications of surgery, especially after surgery for a thoracolumbar spinal fracture. Intravenous lidocaine is a potential method to improve postoperative gastrointestinal function in surgical patients, reduce opioid use and shorten hospital stays. The purpose of this study is to explore the effect of intravenous lidocaine on the recovery of gastrointestinal function in patients after thoracolumbar surgery.

METHODS

In this study, 48 eligible patients undergoing elective thoracolumbar spine fractures resection and internal fixation surgery were enrolled to receive intravenous injections of lidocaine in different concentrations during the perioperative period. Patients were randomly divided into three groups: control group (group A), low concentration of lidocaine group (group B) and high concentration of lidocaine group (group C), 16 patients in each group. First postoperative exhaust time, numbers of bowel sound at preoperative and postoperative 3, 6, 12, 24 h, pain scores at postoperative 0, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48 h, total sufentanil use in PACU and perioperative periods, postoperative hospital stay and analgesic remedy within postoperative 48 h were recorded and compared. The primary endpoints include: the time of first flatus passage after the operation, the number of bowel sounds per minute counted with stethoscope at 30 min before anesthesia induction and at 3, 6, 12 and 24 h postoperative. The secondary endpoints included: the pain scores at PACU (after entering into PACU), 3, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h postoperative, the amount of sufentanil administrated by intravenous push during operation and the numbers of patients needed rescuing sufentanil in PACU, and the numbers of patients needed administration of gastric motility drugs or non-steroidal analgesics at ward within 48 h postoperation, length of hospital stay (from the first day after surgery to discharge from hospital) and the incidence of adverse reactions.

RESULTS

Compared with group A, the first postoperative exhaust time in group B and C occurred much earlier (23.3 ± 11.0 h vs. 16.0 ± 6.6 h, 16.6 ± 5.1 h, P < 0.05). Compared with preoperation, the numbers of bowel sound significantly increased at 24 h postoperatively in group B, while group B at 6 h and group C at 6 and 24 h postoperatively had significantly more active bowel sounds compared to group A (P < 0.05). There were no remarkable differences in VAS scores within 12 h postoperatively among three groups, and however, significantly lower VAS scores were found at 12, 24 and 48 h postoperatively in group C when comparing to Group A (p < 0.05). There was no statistical significance in the incidence of postoperative flatulence and nausea and vomiting, the number of patients needed rescuing sufentanil in PACU, the length of postoperative hospital stay and the number of patients requiring non-steroidal analgesics at ward within 48 h postoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous lidocaine infusion together with patient-controlled analgesia of sufentanil expedited the early recovery of gastrointestinal function and improved analgesic quality of sefentanyl in patients undergoing thoracolumbar surgeries.

Efficacy of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection surgery: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are the most common complications following thoracoscopic surgery, resulting in increased hospital costs and perioperative mortality. Studies have shown that intravenous lidocaine infusion can exert its anti-inflammatory properties by reducing the release of proinflammatory cytokines. This study is designed to investigate whether intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion can reduce the incidence of PPCs in adult patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This single-centre, double-blinded study will enrol 366 patients scheduled for video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection surgery. Patients will be randomly assigned to the lidocaine or placebo infusion group in a 1: 1 ratio. The lidocaine group will receive lidocaine intravenously during the intraoperative period, while the placebo group will be administered normal saline at an equal volume, infusion rate and timing. The primary outcome is the incidence of PPCs within 7 days following surgery. The secondary outcomes are quality of postoperative recovery 40 scores; length of hospital stay (determined by the number of days from admission to discharge); incidence of moderate to severe pain within 24 and 48 hours at rest and when coughing; incidence of additional rescue analgesics use and incidence of adverse events.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital (approval no. 20222241). Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients before randomisation. The results of this trial will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2200061979.

Comparison of Ketamine, Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine in Multimodal Analgesia Management Following Sleeve Gastrectomy Surgery: A Randomized Double-Blind Trial

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of ketamine, dexmedetomidine, and lidocaine infusions added to the multimodal analgesia regimen on pain scores and analgesic requirement in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

DESIGN

A prospective randomized double-blind trial. Seventy-three patients aged 18 to 65 years (ASA II-III) undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy were included. The patients were divided into 3 groups. Intravenous (IV) ketamine (0.5 mg/kg/h), dexmedetomidine (0.5 mcg/kg/h), and lidocaine (2 mg/kg/h) were administered to Groups K, D and L, respectively. Postoperative infusions were continued for 12 hours.

METHODS

Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores (during rest and movement) in the admission to postanesthesia care unit, 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48 hours, and on day 15 were assessed postoperatively. Rescue analgesia requirement, the number of patients with nausea, retching, and vomiting, time to mobilization, and hospital length of stay (LOS) were recorded.

FINDINGS

VAS_rest values during all measurements in the first 24 hours, and VAS_movement values in the first 6 hours and at 24 hours were lower in Group L when compared to Group K and Group D (P < .001, P < .001, P = .008, respectively). VAS_rest at 48 hours and VAS_movement at 12 and 48 hours were lower in Group L when compared to Group K (P = .044, P = .001 and P = .011, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference between Group D compared to the other two groups at these times (P > .05). The requirement of rescue analgesia on postoperative day 1 was significantly higher in Group K (P < .001). Hospital LOS was shorter in Group L than in the other groups (P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

IV lidocaine added to multimodal analgesia provided better pain control in the early postoperative period compared to dexmedetomidine and ketamine and decreased the hospital LOS.

ED50 and ED95 of Propofol Combined with Different Doses of Intravenous Lidocaine for First-Trimester Uterine Aspiration: A Prospective Dose-Finding Study Using Up-and-Down Sequential Allocation Method

Purpose

This study aimed to test the effect of different doses of intravenous lidocaine on the median effective dose (ED50) and 95% effective dose (ED95) of propofol-induction dose and identify the optimal dose.

Patients and Methods

Patients undergoing first-trimester uterine aspiration were screened and randomly enrolled into the following groups: saline (L₀), 0.5 mg/kg lidocaine (L_0.5), 1.0 mg/kg lidocaine (L_1.0), and 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine (L_1.5). Anesthesia was induced with 1.0 µg/kg fentanyl. Prepared lidocaine or saline solution was injected later according to allocation, followed by propofol. The dose of propofol for each patient was determined using the up-and-down sequential study design. The primary end point was the ED50 and ED95 of the propofol-induction dose. The total propofol doses, awakening time, and adverse events were recorded.

Results

The ED50 (95% confidence interval) of propofol was significantly lower in groups L_1.0 and L_1.5 than group L₀ (1.6 [1.5–1.7] mg/kg and 1.8 [1.6–1.9] mg/kg, versus 2.4 [2.3–2.5] mg/kg, respectively; p<0.001). There was no significant difference in ED50 between groups L_1.0 and L_1.5 (p>0.05). However, surprisingly, the ED50 was significantly higher in group L_0.5 than L₀ (2.8 [2.6–3.0] mg/kg vs 2.4 [2.3–2.5] mg/kg; p<0.05). The total doses of propofol in groups L_1.0 and L_1.5 were lower than those in groups L₀ and L_0.5 (p<0.05). The systolic blood pressure (SBP) decline after anesthesia induction in group L_0.5 was greater than that in group L₀ (p<0.01). The incidence of respiratory depression in group L_0.5 was greater than that in groups L₀ and L_1.0 (p<0.05).

Conclusion

In patients who underwent first-trimester uterine aspiration, intravenous lidocaine 1.0 mg/kg prior to propofol injection significantly reduced the ED50 of propofol induction dose without severe side effects, equivalent to the effect of 1.5 mg/kg dose. We recommend 1.0 mg/kg as the optimal dose.

Impact of lidocaine on hemodynamic and respiratory parameters during laparoscopic appendectomy in children

We assessed the influence of systemic lidocaine administration on ventilatory and circulatory parameters, and the pneumoperitoneum impact on the cardiopulmonary system during a laparoscopic appendectomy in children. A single-center parallel single-masked randomized controlled study was carried out with 58 patients (3-17 years). Intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg over 5 min before induction of anesthesia followed by lidocaine infusion at 1.5 mg/kg/h intraoperatively. Respiratory system compliance (C, C/kg), P_peak-PEEP and Pulse rate (Pulse), systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure (NBP_s, NBP_d, NBP_m), assessed in the Lidocaine and Control group, at the: beginning (P₁), minimum lung compliance (P₂) and at the end of surgery (P₃) were compared. The respiratory/hemodynamic parameters did not differ between the groups at any stage of operation. Blood Pressure and P_peak-PEEP were significantly higher at the P₂ compared to P₁ and P₃ stages (P < 0.001, 1 - β ≥ 0.895) that correlated with lung compliance changes: C/kg vs. NBP_s and P_peak-PEEP (- 0.42, - 0.84; P < 0.001); C vs. Pulse and P_peak-PEEP (- 0.48, - 0.46; P < 0.001). Although an increase in intraabdominal pressure up to 12(15) mmHg causes significant changes in hemodynamic/respiratory parameters, there appears to be no risk of fatal reactions in 1E, 2E ASA patients. Systemic lidocaine administration doesn't alleviate circulatory/respiratory alterations during pneumoperitoneum. No lidocaine related episode of anaphylaxis, systemic toxicity, circulatory disturbances or neurological impairment occurred.ClinicalTrials.gov: 22/03/2019.Trial registration number: NCT03886896.

Efficacy of systemic lidocaine in postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery: study protocol for a multicentre, prospective, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, superiority, placebo-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Systemic lidocaine may reduce pain intensity and accelerate postoperative recovery. However, the efficacy of systemic lidocaine in cognitive function has not been established. This study protocol is designed to clarify the effectiveness of lidocaine in postoperative delirium (POD) in elderly patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. One thousand and twenty elderly patients will be randomly allocated in a ratio of 1:1 to receive either systemic lidocaine (a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg, followed by an infusion of 1.5 mg/kg/hour until the end of the surgery) or identical volumes and rates of 0.9% saline. The primary outcome measure is the prevalence of POD during the first 5 postoperative days. Secondary outcomes include emergence agitation, the area under the curve of the Numeric Rating Scale pain scores over 48 hours, postoperative 48-hour cumulative opioid consumption, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), recovery of bowel function, quality of recovery, and patient satisfaction with postoperative analgesia.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Ethical Committee of the Fujian Provincial Hospital approved the study protocol (ref: K2021-06-018). Other participating subcentres must also obtain ethics committee approval before the start of the study. We will obtain written informed consent from each patient before they are randomised. This study will be presented at scientific conferences and submitted to international journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100050314.

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on propofol consumption in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy: a double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy with propofol as sedation are prone to respiratory or cardiovascular complications. Intravenous lidocaine has analgesic efficacy and reduces propofol consumption during surgery. Here, the effect of intravenous lidocaine on propofol consumption was evaluated in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

Patients were randomly allocated to receive intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg bolus dose, followed by a 2 mg/kg/h continuous infusion during the procedure; Group L) or a placebo (saline; Group N). During the procedure, sedation was achieved by propofol. The following outcomes were recorded: total propofol consumption; time to loss of consciousness; number of airway modifications; time to the first airway intervention; incidence of sedation-related events; pain score after awakening; endoscopists' and patients' satisfaction scores; memory level of the procedure; and adverse events within 24 h postoperatively.

RESULTS

Compared with Group N, propofol consumption was reduced by 13.2% in Group L (100.30 ± 25.29 mg vs. 115.58 ± 27.52 mg, respectively, p = 0.008). Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the median time to the loss of consciousness episode was shorter in Group L than in Group N (40 s vs. 55 s, respectively, log rank p < 0.0001). The number of airway modifications, time to the first airway intervention, incidence of sedation-related events, time to awakening, pain score after awakening, endoscopists' and patients' satisfaction scores, memory level of the procedure and adverse events within 24 h postoperatively did not differ between the two groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous lidocaine can reduce propofol consumption in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy, with quicker time to loss of consciousness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The clinical trial was registered at (12/01/2021, ChiCTR2100042001 ).

Opioid-free anesthesia in oncologic surgery: the rules of the game

BACKGROUND

Opioids are frequently used in the postoperative period due to their analgesic properties. While these drugs reduce nociceptive somatic, visceral, and neuropathic pain, they may also lead to undesirable effects such as respiratory depression, urinary retention, nausea and vomiting, constipation, itching, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, tolerance, addiction, and immune system disorders. Anesthesiologists are in the critical position of finding balance between using opioids when they are necessary and implementing opioid-sparing strategies to avoid the known harmful effects. This article aims to give an overview of opioid-free anesthesia.

MAIN BODY

This paper presents an overview of opioid-free anesthesia and opioid-sparing anesthetic techniques. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies are discussed, highlighting the possible advantages and drawbacks of each approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Choosing the best anesthetic protocol for a patient undergoing cancer surgery is not an easy task and the available literature provides no definitive answers. In our opinion, opioid-sparing strategies should always be implemented in routine practice and opioid-free anesthesia should be considered whenever possible. Non-pharmacological strategies such as patient education, while generally underrepresented in scientific literature, may warrant consideration in clinical practice.

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.

Lido-OH, a Hydroxyl Derivative of Lidocaine, Produced a Similar Local Anesthesia Profile as Lidocaine With Reduced Systemic Toxicities

Background: lidocaine is one of the most commonly used local anesthetics for the treatment of pain and arrhythmia. However, it could cause systemic toxicities when plasma concentration is raised. To reduce lidocaine’s toxicity, we designed a hydroxyl derivative of lidocaine (lido-OH), and its local anesthesia effects and systemic toxicity in vivo were quantitively investigated.

Method: the effectiveness for lido-OH was studied using mouse tail nerve block, rat dorsal subcutaneous infiltration, and rat sciatic nerve block models. The systemic toxicities for lido-OH were evaluated with altered state of consciousness (ASC), arrhythmia, and death in mice. Lidocaine and saline were used as positive and negative control, respectively. The dose-effect relationships were analyzed.

Results: the half effective-concentration for lido-OH were 2.1 mg/ml with 95% confident interval (CI95) 1.6–3.1 (lidocaine: 3.1 mg/ml with CI95 2.6–4.3) in tail nerve block, 8.2 mg/ml with CI95 8.0–9.4 (lidocaine: 6.9 mg/ml, CI95 6.8–7.1) in sciatic nerve block, and 5.9 mg/ml with CI95 5.8–6.0 (lidocaine: 3.1 mg/ml, CI95 2.4–4.0) in dorsal subcutaneous anesthesia, respectively. The magnitude and duration of lido-OH were similar with lidocaine. The half effective doses (ED₅₀) of lido-OH for ACS was 45.4 mg/kg with CI95 41.6–48.3 (lidocaine: 3.1 mg/kg, CI95 1.9–2.9), for arrhythmia was 16.0 mg/kg with CI95 15.4–16.8 (lidocaine: 3.0 mg/kg, CI95 2.7–3.3), and for death was 99.4 mg/kg with CI95 75.7–124.1 (lidocaine: 23.1 mg/kg, CI95 22.8–23.4). The therapeutic index for lido-OH and lidocaine were 35.5 and 5.6, respectively.

Conclusion: compared with lidocaine, lido-OH produced local anesthesia at similar potency and efficacy, but with significantly reduced systemic toxicities.

Perioperative Intravenous Lidocaine and Metastatic Cancer Recurrence - A Narrative Review

Cancer is a major global health problem and the second leading cause of death worldwide. When detected early, surgery provides a potentially curative intervention for many solid organ tumours. Unfortunately, cancer frequently recurs postoperatively. Evidence from laboratory and retrospective clinical studies suggests that the choice of anaesthetic and analgesic agents used perioperatively may influence the activity of residual cancer cells and thus affect subsequent recurrence risk. The amide local anaesthetic lidocaine has a well-established role in perioperative therapeutics, whether used systemically as an analgesic agent or in the provision of regional anaesthesia. Under laboratory conditions, lidocaine has been shown to inhibit cancer cell behaviour and exerts beneficial effects on components of the inflammatory and immune responses which are known to affect cancer biology. These findings raise the possibility that lidocaine administered perioperatively as a safe and inexpensive intravenous infusion may provide significant benefits in terms of long term cancer outcomes. However, despite the volume of promising laboratory data, robust prospective clinical evidence supporting beneficial anti-cancer effects of perioperative lidocaine treatment is lacking, although trials are planned to address this. This review provides a state of the art summary of the current knowledge base and recent advances regarding perioperative lidocaine therapy, its biological effects and influence on postoperative cancer outcomes.

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.

Novel Opiate-Free Anesthetic Technique for Major Urologic Procedures

OBJECTIVES

We postulated that an opiate-free (OF) general anesthesia (GA) technique could adequately control a patient's pain without adversely affecting recovery. We compared patients undergoing major urologic procedures with and without opiate-based GA.

METHODS

A propensity-matched analysis was performed comparing hospital length of stay, postoperative nausea and vomiting, ileus occurrence, postanesthesia care unit, and total opiate consumption, as well as sedation and hemodynamic variables. The data are expressed as medians and were analyzed with the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. P < 0.05 indicate statistical significance.

RESULTS

In total, 166 patients were evaluated in both the OF group and the opiate-based treatment group. American Society of Anesthesiologists classification and age were comparable, with most surgeries being laparoscopic and confined to the bladder, kidney, and prostate gland. The median opiate consumption in morphine equivalents in the postanesthesia care unit was 7.7 mg (range 5-11.7 mg) for the OF cohort versus 11.7 mg (range 5-17.3 mg) for the control group (P < 0.001). Similarly, the median total postoperative opiate consumption in morphine equivalents was 23.9 mg (range 13.8-42.4 mg) for the OF group compared with 32.1 mg (range 17.38-57.51 mg) for the control group (P = 0.0081). The median hospital length of stay for the OF group was 1.4 days (range 1.2-2.3 days) versus 1.3 days (range 1.2-2.4 days) for the control group (P = 0.8466).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a statistically significant difference in opiate consumption postoperatively for patients who underwent an OF technique compared with a conventional opiate-based technique. This technique appears to be a possible alternative approach, without any apparent untoward consequences during admission.

Effects of intravenous lidocaine, dexmedetomidine, and their combination on IL-1, IL-6 and TNF-α in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy: a prospective, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical-related inflammatory responses have negative effects on postoperative recovery. Intravenous (IV) lidocaine and dexmedetomidine inhibits the inflammatory response. We investigated whether the co-administration of lidocaine and dexmedetomidine could further alleviate inflammatory responses compared with lidocaine or dexmedetomidine alone during laparoscopic hysterectomy.

METHODS

A total of 160 patients were randomly allocated into four groups following laparoscopic hysterectomy: the control group (group C) received normal saline, the lidocaine group (group L) received lidocaine (bolus infusion of 1.5 mg/kg over 10 min, 1.5 mg/kg/h continuous infusion), the dexmedetomidine group (group D) received dexmedetomidine (bolus infusion of 0.5 μg/kg over 10 min, 0.4 μg/kg/h continuous infusion), and the lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine group (group LD) received a combination of lidocaine (bolus infusion of 1.5 mg/kg over 10 min, 1.5 mg/kg/h continuous infusion) and dexmedetomidine (bolus infusion of 0.5 μg/kg over 10 min, 0.4 μg/kg/h continuous infusion). The levels of plasma interleukin-1 (IL-1), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) at different time points were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic variables, postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, time to first flatus, and incidence of nausea and vomiting after surgery.

RESULTS

The levels of plasma IL-1, IL-6, and TNF-α were lower in groups D and LD than in group C and were lowest in group LD at the end of the procedure and 2 h after the operation (P < 0.05). The VAS scores were decreased in groups D and LD compared with group C (P < 0.05). The heart rate (HR) was decreased at the end of the procedure and 2 h after the operation in groups D and LD compared to groups C and L (P < 0.001). The mean blood pressure (MBP) was lower at 2 h after the operation in groups L, D, and LD than in group C (P < 0.001). There was a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in group LD than in group C (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of lidocaine and dexmedetomidine significantly alleviated the inflammatory responses, decreased postoperative pain, and led to fewer PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03276533 ), registered on August 23, 2017.

Efficacy of intravenous lidocaine infusions for pain relief in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Intravenous lidocaine, a potent local anesthetic with analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties, has been shown to be an effective adjunct that reduces intra- and postoperative opioid consumption and facilitates pain management in adults. While it shows promise for use in the pediatric population, limited evidence is available.

Objectives

To determine if general anesthesia with intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion versus general anesthesia without intravenous lidocaine infusion in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy decreased opioid requirements intra- and postoperatively.

Design

A single-center parallel single-masked randomized controlled study. A computer-generated blocked randomization list was used to allocate participants. The study was conducted between March 2019 and January 2020. Setting: Pediatric teaching hospital in Poland.

Participants

Seventy-four patients aged between 18 months and 18 years undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. Seventy-one patients fulfilled the study requirements.

Intervention

Intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg over 5 min before induction of anesthesia followed by lidocaine infusion at 1.5 mg/kg/h intraoperatively. The infusion was discontinued before the patients’ transfer to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU).

Primary outcome measure

The primary outcome measure was total nalbuphine requirement in milligrams during the first 24 h after surgery.

Secondary outcome measures

The secondary outcome measures were intraoperative fentanyl consumption, intraoperative sevoflurane consumption, time to the first rescue analgesic request, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting during the first 24 h after surgery, frequency of side effects of lidocaine.

Results

Children (n = 74) aged 5–17 randomly allocated to receive intraoperative lidocaine infusion (n = 37) or no intervention (n = 37). Seventy-one were included in the analysis (35 in the study group and 36 in the control group). There was no difference in the cumulative dose of nalbuphine in the first 24 h after removal of the endotracheal tube between groups [median of 0.1061 (IQR: 0.0962–0.2222) mg/kg in the lidocaine group, compared to the control group median of 0.1325 (IQR: 0.0899–0.22020) mg/kg, p = 0.63].

Intraoperative fentanyl consumption was lower in the lidocaine group [median of 5.091 (IQR: 4.848–5.714) μg/kg] than in the control group [median of 5.969 (IQR: 5.000–6.748), p = 0.03].

Taking into account the additional doses administered based on clinical indications, the reduction in the requirement for fentanyl in the lidocaine group was even greater [median of 0.0 (IQR: 0.0–0.952) vs 0.99 (IQR: 0.0–1.809) μg/kg, p = 0.01].

No difference was observed in the sevoflurane consumption between the two groups [median of 32.5 ml (IQR 25.0–43.0) in the lidocaine group vs median of 35.0 ml (IQR: 23.5–46.0) in the control group, p = 0.56].

The time to first analgesic request in the lidocaine group was prolonged [median of 55 (IQR: 40–110) min in the lidocaine group vs median of 40.5 (IQR: 28–65) min in the control group, p = 0.05].

There was no difference in the frequency of PONV between the two groups (48.57% in the lidocaine group vs 61.11% in the control group, p = 0.29).

No lidocaine related incidence of anaphylaxis, systemic toxicity, circulatory disturbances or neurological impairment was reported, during anesthesia or postoperative period.

Conclusions

Intraoperative systemic lidocaine administration reduced the intraoperative requirement for opioids in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. This effect was time limited, and hence did not affect opioid consumption in the first 24 h following discontinuation of lidocaine infusion.

Trial registration

NCT03886896.

Efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine in propofol-based sedation for ERCP procedures: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Propofol-based sedation is widely used in ERCP procedures, but adverse respiratory or cardiovascular events commonly occur. Intravenous injection of lidocaine has an analgesic effect and can reduce the requirements of fentanyl and propofol during abdominal surgery. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine on propofol requirements during ERCP procedures.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients scheduled for ERCP were randomly divided into 2 groups, the lidocaine group and the control group. All patients received .02 mg/kg midazolam and .1 μg/kg sufentanil intravenously as premedication. A bolus of propofol was applied for induction of sedation, and perfusion of propofol was applied for maintenance. Patients in the lidocaine group received a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine intravenously followed by continuous infusion of 2 mg/kg/h, whereas the control group received the same volumes of saline solution. The primary outcome was the propofol requirement during ERCP.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, propofol requirements were reduced by 33.8% in the lidocaine group (212.0 ± 118.2 mg vs 320.0 ± 189.6 mg, P = .023). Involuntary movement was less common in the lidocaine group than in the control group (12.5% vs 41.7%, P = .049). In the lidocaine group, postprocedure pain and fatigue, as measured by the visual analog scale, were significantly reduced (0 [range, 0-4] vs 3 [range, 0-5], P = .005; 2 [range, 0-4] vs 5 [range, 2-8], P < .001).The incidence of oxygen desaturation, hypotension, and bradycardia tended to be lower in the lidocaine group.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous lidocaine can significantly decrease propofol requirements during ERCP, with higher sedation quality and endoscopist satisfaction. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03996577.).

Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine on Postoperative Pain in Patients Undergoing Intraspinal Tumor Resection: Study Protocol for a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Patients undergoing intraspinal tumor resection usually experience severe acute pain, delaying postoperative rehabilitation, and increasing incidence of chronic pain. Recently, an increasing number of studies have found that low-dose intravenous lidocaine infusion during and/or after surgery can reduce opioid usage and the incidence of related side effects, inhibit hyperalgesia and promote recovery. Thus far, no studies have evaluated the analgesic effect and safety of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion for intraspinal tumor resection, especially the long-term analgesic effects of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with lidocaine during the first postoperative 48 hours. This study tests the hypothesis that intra- and postoperative systemic lidocaine infusion for patients undergoing intraspinal tumor resection can relieve postoperative acute or chronic pain and reduce the opioid dosage and incidence of related side effects without other problems.

Study Design and Methods

This is a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, and double-blinded study. In total, 180 participants scheduled for intraspinal tumor resection will be randomly divided into lidocaine and placebo groups. The lidocaine group will be administered lidocaine intravenously during anesthesia and postoperative pain management during the first 48 postoperative hours; the placebo group will be administered normal saline at the same volume, infusion rate, and timing. The primary outcome will be the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score. Secondary outcomes will be postoperative cumulative sufentanil consumption, indicators of postoperative recovery, and the incidence of perioperative adverse events.

Discussion

This study investigates the effect of continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion on postoperative sufentanil consumption and VAS scores. The findings will provide a new strategy of anesthesia and analgesia management for intraspinal tumor resection.

Neuroanesthesia Guidelines for Optimizing Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Neuromonitoring During Deformity and Complex Spinal Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Study

STUDY DESIGN

Expert opinion-modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE

We used a modified Delphi approach to obtain consensus among leading spinal deformity surgeons and their neuroanesthesiology teams regarding optimal practices for obtaining reliable motor evoked potential (MEP) signals.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of transcranial MEPs provides the best method for assessing spinal cord integrity during complex spinal surgeries. MEPs are affected by pharmacological and physiological parameters. It is the responsibility of the spine surgeon and neuroanesthesia team to understand how they can best maintain high-quality MEP signals throughout surgery. Nevertheless, varying approaches to neuroanesthesia are seen in clinical practice.

METHODS

We identified 19 international expert spinal deformity treatment teams. A modified Delphi process with two rounds of surveying was performed. Greater than 50% agreement on the final statements was considered "agreement"; >75% agreement was considered "consensus."

RESULTS

Anesthesia regimens and protocols were obtained from the expert centers. There was a large amount of variability among centers. Two rounds of consensus surveying were performed, and all centers participated in both rounds of surveying. Consensus was obtained for 12 of 15 statements, and majority agreement was obtained for two of the remaining statements. Total intravenous anesthesia was identified as the preferred method of maintenance, with few centers allowing for low mean alveolar concentration of inhaled anesthetic. Most centers advocated for <150 μg/kg/min of propofol with titration to the lowest dose that maintains appropriate anesthesia depth based on awareness monitoring. Use of adjuvant intravenous anesthetics, including ketamine, low-dose dexmedetomidine, and lidocaine, may help to reduce propofol requirements without negatively effecting MEP signals.

CONCLUSION

Spine surgeons and neuroanesthesia teams should be familiar with methods for optimizing MEPs during deformity and complex spinal cases. Although variability in practices exists, there is consensus among international spinal deformity treatment centers regarding best practices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.

Intraoperative lidocaine infusion and 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption in obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery is the most effective long-term treatment for obesity. Opioid-sparing anesthesia and multimodal analgesia such as lidocaine infusion have been recommended in these patients to reduce opioid-related complications. However, evidence supporting its use for bariatric surgery population is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether intraoperative lidocaine infusion is associated with decreasing opioid consumption in laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

SETTING

A university hospital, California, USA.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, outcomes among consecutive obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery between January 2016 to December 2018 were evaluated to determine the impact of adjunctive intraoperative lidocaine infusion on 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption. Secondary outcomes, including opioid consumption during hospitalization, length of stay, and postoperative complications were determined. Post hoc analyses were performed exploring possible dose effects and drug-drug interactions. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with opioid consumption.

RESULTS

Among 345 patients, 54 (15.7%) received intraoperative lidocaine infusion (L+) whereas 291 (84.3%) did not receive intraoperative lidocaine infusion (L-). Both L+ and L- groups shared similar demographic characteristics. The 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption was 17.6% lower in L+ (95% confidence interval -28.4 to -5.2, P = .007), but nonsignificantly lower in the multivariate model (12.8%, 95% confidence interval -24.4 to .5, P = .06). Opioid consumption during hospitalization, length of stay, and other clinically significant outcomes did not differ. However, subgroup analysis restricted to opioid-naïve patients indicated significantly reduced opioid consumption in the L+ group. Post hoc analysis suggested interaction between lidocaine and ketamine in decreasing 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative lidocaine infusion was not significantly associated with decreasing 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption in obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

Meta-analysis of the effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine on return of gastrointestinal function after colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Return of normal gastrointestinal (GI) function is a critical determinant of recovery after colorectal surgery. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate whether perioperative intravenous (IV) lidocaine benefits return of gastrointestinal function after colorectal resection.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of Ovid Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and clinicaltrials.org was performed on 1st July 2018. A manual search of reference lists was also performed. Inclusion criteria were as follows: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intravenous (IV) lidocaine administered perioperatively compared to placebo (0.9% saline infusion) as part of a multimodal perioperative analgesic regimen, human adults (> 16 years), and open or laparoscopic colorectal resectional surgery.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

non-colorectal surgery, non-placebo comparator, children, non-general anaesthetic, and pharmacokinetic studies. The primary endpoint was time to first bowel movement. Secondary endpoints were time to first passage of flatus, time to toleration of diet, nausea and vomiting, ileus, pain scores, opioid analgesia consumption, and length of stay.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety one studies were screened, with 9 RCTs meeting inclusion criteria (405 patients, four laparoscopic and five open surgery studies). IV lidocaine reduced time to first bowel movement compared to placebo [seven studies, 325 patients, mean weighted difference - 9.54 h, 95% CI 18.72-0.36, p = 0.04]. Ileus, pain scores, and length of stay were reduced with IV lidocaine compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative IV lidocaine may improve recovery of gastrointestinal function after colorectal surgery. Large-scale effectiveness studies to measure effect size and evaluate optimum dose/duration are warranted.

Comparison of Efficacy Outcomes of Lidocaine Spray, Topical Lidocaine Injection, and Lidocaine General Anesthesia in Nasal Bone Fractures Surgeries: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Background

Lidocaine is widely used as a general and local anesthetic in minor or major surgeries. The objective of the study was to compare postoperative pain relief and adverse events using different forms of lidocaine administration in patients following closed nasal bone reduction surgery.

Material/Methods

A total of 381 patients with a solitary nasal fracture that could be managed with closed reduction were included in this study and divided into 3 groups of 127 patients in each group. Patients had received 1% lidocaine HCl with epinephrine (LL group), inserted a mesh impregnated with lidocaine spray (TL group), or 1 mg/kg/h lidocaine infusion (GL group) before surgeries. Patients also received morphine when the pain was not controlled. The postoperative pain was assessed at 6 hours and 48 hours after surgery. Postoperative vomiting and nausea were evaluated. Repeated ANOVA/Tukey-Kramer multiple comparisons test was performed at 95% confidence level.

Results

At 6 hours after surgery, patients in the general lidocaine (GL) group reported decreased postoperative pain compared with those in the topical lidocaine (TL) group (P<0.001, q=6.633) and LL group (P<0.001, q=8.056). The morphine consumption within 48 hours was least in GL group than TL group (P<0.001, q=172.9) and LL group (P<0.001, q=226.42). Lidocaine infusion caused nausea (P<0.001, q=6.742) and vomiting (P<0.001, q=4.306).

Conclusions

Topical lidocaine anesthesia had the same postoperative pain relief and the least adverse events as local and general lidocaine anesthesia.

Continuous intravenous perioperative lidocaine infusion for postoperative pain and recovery in adults

BACKGROUND

The management of postoperative pain and recovery is still unsatisfactory in a number of cases in clinical practice. Opioids used for postoperative analgesia are frequently associated with adverse effects, including nausea and constipation, preventing smooth postoperative recovery. Not all patients are suitable for, and benefit from, epidural analgesia that is used to improve postoperative recovery. The non-opioid, lidocaine, was investigated in several studies for its use in multimodal management strategies to reduce postoperative pain and enhance recovery. This review was published in 2015 and updated in January 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and risks) of perioperative intravenous (IV) lidocaine infusion compared to placebo/no treatment or compared to epidural analgesia on postoperative pain and recovery in adults undergoing various surgical procedures.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and reference lists of articles in January 2017. We searched one trial registry contacted researchers in the field, and handsearched journals and congress proceedings. We updated this search in February 2018, but have not yet incorporated these results into the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of continuous perioperative IV lidocaine infusion either with placebo, or no treatment, or with thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) in adults undergoing elective or urgent surgery under general anaesthesia. The IV lidocaine infusion must have been started intraoperatively, prior to incision, and continued at least until the end of surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used Cochrane's standard methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: pain score at rest; gastrointestinal recovery and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included: postoperative nausea and postoperative opioid consumption. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 new trials in the update. In total, the review included 68 trials (4525 randomized participants). Two trials compared IV lidocaine with TEA. In all remaining trials, placebo or no treatment was used as a comparator. Trials involved participants undergoing open abdominal (22), laparoscopic abdominal (20), or various other surgical procedures (26). The application scheme of systemic lidocaine strongly varies between the studies related to both dose (1 mg/kg/h to 5 mg/kg/h) and termination of the infusion (from the end of surgery until several days after).The risk of bias was low with respect to selection bias (random sequence generation), performance bias, attrition bias, and detection bias in more than 50% of the included studies. For allocation concealment and selective reporting, the quality assessment yielded low risk of bias for only approximately 20% of the included studies.IV Lidocaine compared to placebo or no treatment We are uncertain whether IV lidocaine improves postoperative pain compared to placebo or no treatment at early time points (1 to 4 hours) (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.72 to -0.28; 29 studies, 1656 participants; very low-quality evidence) after surgery. Due to variation in the standard deviation (SD) in the studies, this would equate to an average pain reduction of between 0.37 cm and 2.48 cm on a 0 to 10 cm visual analogue scale . Assuming approximately 1 cm on a 0 to 10 cm pain scale is clinically meaningful, we ruled out a clinically relevant reduction in pain with lidocaine at intermediate (24 hours) (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.04; 33 studies, 1847 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and at late time points (48 hours) (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.04; 24 studies, 1404 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Due to variation in the SD in the studies, this would equate to an average pain reduction of between 0.10 cm to 0.48 cm at 24 hours and 0.08 cm to 0.42 cm at 48 hours. In contrast to the original review in 2015, we did not find any significant subgroup differences for different surgical procedures.We are uncertain whether lidocaine reduces the risk of ileus (risk ratio (RR) 0.37, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.87; 4 studies, 273 participants), time to first defaecation/bowel movement (mean difference (MD) -7.92 hours, 95% CI -12.71 to -3.13; 12 studies, 684 participants), risk of postoperative nausea (overall, i.e. 0 up to 72 hours) (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91; 35 studies, 1903 participants), and opioid consumption (overall) (MD -4.52 mg morphine equivalents , 95% CI -6.25 to -2.79; 40 studies, 2201 participants); quality of evidence was very low for all these outcomes.The effect of IV lidocaine on adverse effects compared to placebo treatment is uncertain, as only a small number of studies systematically analysed the occurrence of adverse effects (very low-quality evidence).IV Lidocaine compared to TEAThe effects of IV lidocaine compared with TEA are unclear (pain at 24 hours (MD 1.51, 95% CI -0.29 to 3.32; 2 studies, 102 participants), pain at 48 hours (MD 0.98, 95% CI -1.19 to 3.16; 2 studies, 102 participants), time to first bowel movement (MD -1.66, 95% CI -10.88 to 7.56; 2 studies, 102 participants); all very low-quality evidence). The risk for ileus and for postoperative nausea (overall) is also unclear, as only one small trial assessed these outcomes (very low-quality evidence). No trial assessed the outcomes, 'pain at early time points' and 'opioid consumption (overall)'. The effect of IV lidocaine on adverse effects compared to TEA is uncertain (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether IV perioperative lidocaine, when compared to placebo or no treatment, has a beneficial impact on pain scores in the early postoperative phase, and on gastrointestinal recovery, postoperative nausea, and opioid consumption. The quality of evidence was limited due to inconsistency, imprecision, and study quality. Lidocaine probably has no clinically relevant effect on pain scores later than 24 hours. Few studies have systematically assessed the incidence of adverse effects. There is a lack of evidence about the effects of IV lidocaine compared with epidural anaesthesia in terms of the optimal dose and timing (including the duration) of the administration. We identified three ongoing studies, and 18 studies are awaiting classification; the results of the review may change when these studies are published and included in the review.

Intravenous lidocaine infusion for pain control after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficiency and safety of intravenous infusion of lidocaine for pain management after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed (August 1966-2017), Medline (August 1966-2017), Embase (August 1980-2017), ScienceDirect (August 1985-2017), and the Cochrane Library. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Fixed/random effect model was used according to the heterogeneity tested by I2 statistic. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata.11.0 software.

RESULTS

A total of 5 RCTs were retrieved involving 274 patients. The present meta-analysis indicated that there were significant differences between groups in terms of visual analog scale scores at 12hours (weighted mean difference [WMD]=-0.743, 95% CI: -1.246 to -0.240, P = .004), 24hours (WMD=-0.712, 95% CI: -1.239 to -0.184, P = .008), and 48hours (WMD=-0.600, 95% CI: -0.972 to -0.229, P = .002) after LC. Significant differences were found regarding opioid consumption at 12hours (WMD=-3.136, 95% CI: -5.591 to -0.680, P = .012), 24hours (WMD=-4.739, 95% CI: -8.291 to -1.188, P = .009), and 48hours (WMD=-3.408, 95% CI: -5.489 to -1.326, P = .001) after LC.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous lidocaine infusion significantly reduced postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption after LC. In addition, there were fewer adverse effects in the lidocaine groups. Higher quality RCTs are still required for further research.