Efficacy of intravenous lidocaine on pain relief in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on Ciprofol dose in patients undergoing painless gastrointestinal endoscopy: a double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Ciprofol (CIP) for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy (GE) can cause respiratory or cardiovascular complications. The literature suggests that intravenous (IV) lidocaine infusion can alleviate visceral pain and enhance humans' ventilator response to CO2. Therefore, it was hypothesized that IV lidocaine could reduce the CIP dose for painless GE and improve recovery time.

METHODS

This randomized placebo-controlled trial included 40 patients undergoing GE. After CIP titration for unconsciousness, patients in group L were given IV lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg bolus dose, then a 2 mg/kg/h continuous infusion); the same volume saline as placebo was given for N group patients. The primary endpoint was the required CIP dose. Secondary endpoints were: endoscopic examination time, awakening time, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge time, pain and fatigue after awakening, adverse events, and endoscopist's and patient's satisfaction.

RESULTS

Both cohorts had comparable demographic characteristics. Group L's CIP consumption was decreased by 23.0% than the N group (47.38 ± 7.45 mg vs. 61.50 ± 9.44 mg, respectively, p < 0.001). Awakening time (P=0.002), PACU discharge time (P < 0.001), pain (P = 0.008), and fatigue (P = 0.004) after awakening were also reduced in group L. Furthermore, group L had higher satisfaction scores than group N (P = 0.017). No marked difference was identified in the incidence of unfavorable effects (P > 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Lidocaine IV infusion caused a 23.0% reduction in CIP requirements during GE. Furthermore, post-endoscopic pain and fatigue were also improved, thus suggesting that lidocaine is an efficient therapeutic option.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial has been submitted to the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: ChiCTR2300069868, registration date: 28/03/2023).

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.

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.

Intravenous lidocaine on postoperative pain and opioid consumption during gynecological surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the role of intravenous lidocaine as a adjuvant anesthetics in patients undergoing gynecological surgery.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from PubMed/Medline, Embase and clinic trails.gov involving the use of intravenous lidocaine in gynecological surgery. We used a more comprehensive search strategy to adequately screen for randomized controlled trials involving intravenous lidocaine infusion in gynecological surgery. First outcomes were postoperative pain scores. And secondary outcomes included 24 h postoperative opioids consumption, time to first flatus, and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 6 RCTs comprising 375 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were statistically significant between postoperative pain scores. The consumption of opioids and anesthetics during surgery and 24 hours after surgery was statistically significant when compared with the control group. Postoperative pain scores were similar at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 48 hours between groups. No statistical differences were found in postoperative complications including nausea, vomiting and restoration of the intestinal function.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicated that the current literature supports the perioperative use of intravenous lidocaine as part of multimodal analgesia and beneficial to patients in early postoperative analgesia, reduced opioid consumption.

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).

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine for postoperative pain in patients undergoing breast surgery: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The effectiveness of intravenous lidocaine infusion in managing acute and chronic pain following breast surgery has been a topic of debate. This meta-analysis aims to assess the impact of perioperative intravenous lidocaine on the relief of postoperative pain among patients undergoing breast surgery.

Methods

A systematic search of databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of intravenous lidocaine infusion with placebo or routine care in patients undergoing breast surgery. The primary outcome of interest was the occurrence of chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) at the longest follow-up. Meta-analyses, incorporating trial sequential analysis, were performed using a random-effects model to assess the overall effect.

Results

A total of twelve trials, involving 879 patients, were included in the analysis. Perioperative intravenous lidocaine demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of CPSP at the longest follow-up (risk ratio [RR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.81; P = 0.0005; I2 = 6%). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) indicated that the cumulative z curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit, providing sufficient and conclusive evidence. Furthermore, intravenous lidocaine was associated with decreased opioid consumption and a shorter length of hospital stay.

Conclusion

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine is effective in relieving acute and CPSP in patients undergoing breast surgery.

Systematic review registration

https://inplasy.com/, identifier INPLASY2022100033.

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.

Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery

Background

Perioperative pain management is a major challenge for anaesthesiologists. IV lidocaine and dexmedetomidine have been utilised for peri-operative pain management.

Aims and Objectives

To analyse the effects of intraoperative intravenous lignocaine/dexmedetomidine on pain relief, opioid consumption, peri-operative hemodynamic and side-effect profiles/unique interactions in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries.

Materials and Methods

Prospective, interventional, single-centric, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, Helsinki protocol-compliant clinical study was conducted on 90 ASA I/II class patients aged 18-60 yrs. This Patients were block-randomised to Group-L (2% Lignocaine), Group-D (dexmedetomidine) and Group C (Control/Placebo/0.9% normal saline). Hemodynamic were noted at pre-defined time frames intra-/post-operatively. Post-operative VAS score and Richmond Agitation Sedation Score monitoring was done.

Results

Demographic parameters of were comparable. Mean intra-operative fentanyl consumption amongst the three groups were 20.5 ± 20.05 mcg, 26.5 ± 17.57 mcg and 46.83 + 21.31 mcg (Group-L, Group-D, Group-C; P value Group-L vs Group-D:0.22, Group L/D vs Group C: <0.0001). Group-D exhibited the lower heart rates and MAP (P < 0.05). Extubation- First rescue analgesic phase was comparable for the Group-C and Group-L (59.17 ± 46.224 min vs 61.64 ± 53.819 min) and significantly greater in Group-D (136.07 + 55.350 min; P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Both Dexmedetomidine and lignocaine can be useful intra-operative pain relief adjuncts. Dexmedetomidine delayed First rescue analgesic and total analgesic consumption more than lignocaine. Dexmedetomidine patients exhibited bradycardia intraoperatively more than the other groups. we recommend, Dexmedetomidine in the intra-operative phase and lignocaine in the post-operative phase can be an alternative in patients who are poor candidates for post-operative opioids/sedation/contraindicated regional anaesthesia regimes.

Effects of Lidocaine on Motor-Evoked Potentials and Somatosensory-Evoked Potentials in Patients Undergoing Intraspinal Tumour Resection: Study Protocol for a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Study Design and Methods

Discussion

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.

Impact of intravenous and topical lidocaine on clinical outcomes in patients receiving propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of i.v. or topical lidocaine as an anaesthesia adjunct in improving clinical outcomes in patients receiving gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures under propofol sedation remains unclear.

METHODS

Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library) were searched for RCTs comparing the clinical outcomes with or without lidocaine application (i.v. or topical) in patients receiving propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures from inception to 29 March 2021. The primary outcome was propofol dosage, while secondary outcomes included procedure time, recovery time, adverse events (e.g. oxygen desaturation), post-procedural pain, and levels of endoscopist and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Twelve trials (1707 patients) published between 2011 and 2020 demonstrated that addition of i.v. (n=7) or topical (n=5) lidocaine to propofol sedation decreased the level of post-procedural pain (standardised mean difference [SMD]=-0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.8 to -0.14), risks of gag events (risk ratio [RR]=0.51, 95% CI: 0.35-0.75), and involuntary movement (RR=0.4, 95% CI: 0.16-0.96). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that only i.v. lidocaine reduced propofol dosage required for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures (SMD=-0.83, 95% CI: -1.19 to -0.47), increased endoscopist satisfaction (SMD=0.75, 95% CI: 0.21-1.29), and shortened the recovery time (SMD=-0.83, 95% CI: -1.45 to -0.21). Intravenous or topical lidocaine did not affect the incidence of oxygen desaturation (RR=0.72, 95% CI: 0.41-1.24) or arterial hypotension (RR=0.6, 95% CI: 0.22-1.65) and procedure time (SMD=0.21, 95% CI: -0.09 to 0.51).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that i.v. or topical lidocaine appears safe to use and may be of benefit for improving propofol sedation in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures. Further large-scale trials are warranted to support our findings.

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.

Intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the role of intravenous lidocaine as a supplemental pain control modality in patients undergoing spine surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the use of supplemental intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery. We developed a comprehensive search strategy to adequately screen for randomized controlled trials involving intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery. Continuous outcomes included postoperative opiate consumption and postoperative pain scores. Dichotomous outcomes included nausea, vomiting, pneumonia, delirium, and wound infection.

RESULTS

A total of 3 RCTs comprising 235 patients were selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Cumulative morphine consumption at 48 h was not statistically significant between lidocaine and control groups. Postoperative pain was not statistically significant at any measured time points in the first and second day postoperatively. There was no statistical difference in postoperative complications including nausea, vomiting, pneumonia, delirium, or surgical site infection.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicated that current literature does not support the use of intravenous lidocaine as an adjunctive measure of pain management after spine surgery. Given the relatively few numbers of studies in this field, further randomized controlled trials are needed to make a definitive conclusion on the effectiveness of lidocaine in spine surgery patients.

Intravenous Infusion of Lidocaine Can Accelerate Postoperative Early Recovery in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is defined by intermittent and recurrent episodes of partial or complete obstruction of the upper airway during sleep. Intermittent and recurrent hypoxia/reoxygenation is the main pathophysiological mechanism of OSA. Its consequences include systemic inflammation, activation of the sympathetic nervous system, and release of oxygen free radicals. Infusion of intravenous (IV) lidocaine has anti-inflammatory, antihyperalgesic, and analgesic properties, supporting its use as an anesthetic adjuvant. Lidocaine can reduce nociception and/or cardiovascular responses to surgical stress, as well as postoperative pain and/or analgesic requirements. Because of the high prevalence of OSA in obese patients, the use of opioids to manage postoperative pain in that population is often accompanied by the development of adverse respiratory events, such as hypoventilation and hypoxemia. IV infusion of lidocaine has been shown to enhance the quality of early recovery after laparoscopic bariatric and upper airway surgery. However, limited evidence exists regarding its use in patients undergoing surgery for OSA. In addition, whether IV infusion of lidocaine can improve postoperative early recovery in patients undergoing surgery for OSA remains unknown. Therefore, we hypothesized that IV infusion of lidocaine can improve postoperative early recovery in patients undergoing surgery for OSA. Perioperative infusion also may be a promising analgesic adjunct to enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols.

Application of Intravenous Lidocaine in Obese Patients Undergoing Painless Colonoscopy: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

Propofol for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) for colonoscopy can result in a high prevalence of severe respiratory depression. Studies have shown that intravenous (IV) infusion of lidocaine can reduce propofol requirements significantly and increase the ventilatory response to carbon dioxide in humans. We tested the hypothesis that IV lidocaine could improve propofol-induced respiratory depression in obese patients during colonoscopy.

METHODS

Ninety obese patients scheduled for painless colonoscopy were randomized to receive lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg, then 2 mg/kg/h, IV) or the same volume of 0.9% saline. Intraoperative sedation was provided by propofol. The primary outcome was the number of oxygen-desaturation episodes. Secondary outcomes were: the number of apnea episodes; total propofol consumption; time to the first hypoxia episode; time to consciousness loss; intraoperative hemodynamic parameters; awakening time; adverse events; duration of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay; satisfaction of endoscopists and patients.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics between the two groups were comparable. The number of oxygen-desaturation episodes in group L (1.49±1.12) decreased by 0.622 (P=0.018) compared with that in group N (2.11±1.32), and the number of apnea episodes in group L decreased by 0.533 (P<0.001). Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the median time to the first hypoxia episode was longer in group L (86.78 s) than that in group N (63.83 s) (Log rank P=0.0008). The total propofol consumption, awakening time, and duration of PACU stay were reduced in group L. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of adverse events (P>0.05 for all). Satisfaction scores for endoscopists and patients in group L were higher than that in group N (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous infusion of lidocaine could significantly reduce the number of oxygen-desaturation and apnea episodes in obese patients during painless colonoscopy. This method is worthy of clinical promotion.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2000028937.

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.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Opioids are associated with sedation and respiratory depression. The primary objective of this study was to assess pain intensity after gastric bypass with lidocaine. The secondary objective was to assess the IL-6 concentration, consumption of morphine, time to morphine request, time to extubation, and side effects.

METHODS

Sixty patients aged 18 to 60 years, with ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) scores of 2 or 3, who underwent bariatric surgery were allocated to two groups. Patients in group 1 were administered lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg) 5 min before the induction of anesthesia, and group 2 was administered 0.9% saline solution in an equal volume. Subsequently, lidocaine (2 mg/kg/h) or 0.9% saline was infused during the entire surgical procedure. Anesthesia was performed with fentanyl (5 μg/kg), propofol, rocuronium, and sevoflurane. Postoperative patient-controlled analgesia was provided with morphine. The following were evaluated: pain intensity, IL-6, 24-h consumption of morphine, time to the morphine request, time to extubation, and adverse effects.

RESULTS

The lidocaine group had a lower pain intensity than the saline group for up to 1 h, with no differences between groups in IL-6 and time to extubation. The lidocaine group consumed less morphine within 24 h, had a longer time until the first supplemental morphine request, and had a lower incidence of nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

Lidocaine reduced the intensity of early postoperative pain, incidence of nausea, and consumption of morphine within 24 h and increased time to the first morphine request, without reducing the plasma concentrations of IL-6.

The effect of intraoperative lidocaine infusion on opioid consumption and pain after totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

As a component of multimodal analgesia, the administration of systemic lidocaine is a well-known technique. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of lidocaine infusion on postoperative pain-related outcomes in patients undergoing totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopies inguinal hernioplasty.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled double-blind study, we recruited 64 patients to receive either lidocaine 2% (intravenous bolus 1.5 mg. kg ^- 1 followed by an infusion of 2 mg. kg^- 1. h^- 1), or an equal volume of normal saline. The infusion was initiated just before the induction of anesthesia and discontinued after tracheal extubation. The primary outcome of the study was postoperative morphine equivalent consumption up to 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores, nausea/vomiting (PONV), sedation, quality of recovery (scores based on QoR-40 questionnaire), patient satisfaction, and the incidence of chronic pain.

RESULTS

The median (IQR) cumulative postoperative morphine equivalent consumption in the first 24 h was 0 (0-1) mg in the lidocaine group and 4 [1-8] mg in the saline group (p < 0.001). Postoperative pain intensity at rest and during movement at various time points in the first 24 h were significantly lower in the lidocaine group compared with the saline group (p < 0.05). Fewer patients reported PONV in the lidocaine group than in the saline group (p < 0.05). Median QoR scores at 24 h after surgery were significantly better in the lidocaine group (194 (194-196) than saline group 184 (183-186) (p < 0.001). Patients receiving lidocaine were more satisfied with postoperative analgesia than those receiving saline (p = 0.02). No difference was detected in terms of postoperative sedation and chronic pain after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative lidocaine infusion for laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernioplasty reduces opioid consumption, pain intensity, PONV and improves the quality of recovery and patient satisfaction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov- NCT02601651. Date of registration: November 10, 2015.

Effects of acupuncture at Pericardium-6 and Stomach-36 on nausea, sedation and gastrointestinal motility in healthy dogs administered intravenous lidocaine infusions

The objectives of this study were to assess gastrointestinal transit times, sedation, and signs of nausea associated with intravenous lidocaine infusions in dogs following targeted acupuncture at Pericardium-6 (PC6) and Stomach-36 (ST36). In a randomized, blind crossover design, 6 healthy, adult Beagles were fed thirty 1.5 mm barium-impregnated polyethylene spheres (BIPS), then were subject to 30 minutes of: 1) no acupuncture, 2) bilateral targeted acupuncture at PC6 and ST36, or 3) bilateral non-target acupuncture at Lung-5 (LU5) and Bladder-55 (BL55). Lidocaine was immediately administered at 1 mg/kg intravenously followed by 50 μg/kg/min. BIPS were tracked radiographically; sedation and nausea were scored at baseline (Time 0) and for 11 hours during lidocaine infusions. Transit times and sedation and nausea scores were analyzed with a linear mixed-effects model; the number of BIPS at defined time points was analyzed with a piecewise linear mixed-effects model. All P values were two-sided and P < 0.05 was considered significant. Sedation and nausea scores did not differ between treatments at any time point (all P > 0.05). However, nausea scores in all groups were significantly greater at Times 5 through 7 and at Time 11 compared to Time 0 whereas sedation scores in all groups were significantly greater at Times 2 through 11 compared to Time 0 (all P < 0.05). The number of BIPs found out of the stomach, the number found in the large intestine, gastric emptying and gastrointestinal transit times did not differ between treatments (all P > 0.05). Acupuncture at PC6 and ST36 did not alleviate nausea and sedation associated with lidocaine infusions in clinically normal animals or affect gastric emptying and gastrointestinal transit.

The effect of intraoperative lidocaine versus esmolol infusion on postoperative analgesia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized clinical trial

Background

As a part of multimodal analgesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy, both intraoperative lidocaine and esmolol facilitate postoperative analgesia. Our objective was to compare these two emerging strategies that challenge the use of intraoperative opioids. We aimed to assess if intraoperative esmolol infusion is not inferior to lidocaine infusion for opioid consumption after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial, 90 female patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy received either intravenous (IV) lidocaine bolus 1.5 mg/kg at induction followed by an infusion (1.5 mg/ kg/h) or IV bolus of esmolol 0.5 mg/kg at induction followed by an infusion (5–15 μg/kg/min) till the end of surgery. Remaining aspect of anesthesia followed a standard protocol apart from no intraoperative opioid supplementation. Postoperatively, patients received either morphine or tramadol IV to maintain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores ≤3. The primary outcome was opioid consumption (in morphine equivalents) during the first 24 postoperative hours. Pain and sedation scores, time to first perception of pain and void, and occurrence of nausea/vomiting were secondary outcomes measured up to 24 h postoperatively.

Results

Two patients in each group were excluded from the analysis. The postoperative median (IQR) morphine equivalent consumption in patients receiving esmolol was 1 (0–1.5) mg compared to 1.5 (1–2) mg in lidocaine group (p = 0.27). The median pain scores at various time points were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). More patients receiving lidocaine were sedated in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) than those receiving esmolol (p < 0.05); however, no difference was detected later.

Conclusion

Infusion of esmolol is not inferior to lidocaine in terms of opioid requirement and pain severity in the first 24 h after surgery. Patients receiving lidocaine were more sedated during their stay in PACU than those receiving esmolol.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov- NCT02327923. Date of registration: December 31, 2014.

Effectiveness of non-opioid pharmacological adjuncts for adult surgical patients: an umbrella review protocol

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to determine the effectiveness of non-opioid pharmacological adjuncts for decreasing perioperative morphine equivalents and acute postoperative pain scores in adult surgical patients.

INTRODUCTION

Opioids are commonly administered during anesthesia to dull the senses, relieve pain and induce sleep. However, there are significant adverse effects associated with intraoperative opioid use. Anesthesia providers can impact the current opioid epidemic by administering non-opioid-centric anesthetic medications. A large-scale evidence-based review is needed to inform a standardized non-opioid pain treatment strategy in the perioperative period.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review will consider studies of adults 19 years or older who are undergoing surgical procedures and receiving non-opioid oral or intravenous perioperative analgesic medications administered by the anesthesia team. Studies that include patients who receive non-opioid medication as a local infiltrate by the surgical team will be excluded, as will studies with patients who receive regional or neuraxial opioid-sparing techniques. Only systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in English after 2007 will be considered.

METHODS

MEDLINE, CINAHL and Embase will be searched, as well as two trial registers and two sources of unpublished reviews. Titles and abstracts will be screened to identify potentially relevant papers. Retrieval of full-text studies, assessment of methodological quality and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Meta-analyses will be performed if possible, and a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Summary of Findings presented.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42019135852.