Is intraperitoneal levobupivacaine with epinephrine useful for analgesia following laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A randomized controlled trial

Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation versus no intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Pain is one of the important reasons for delayed discharge after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Use of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic for laparoscopic cholecystectomy may be a way of reducing pain. A previous version of this Cochrane Review found very low-certainty evidence on the benefits and harms of the intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of intraperitoneal instillation of local anaesthetic agents in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, and three other databases to 19 January 2021 together with reference checking of studies retrieved. We also searched five online clinical trials registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials to 10 September 2021. We contacted study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We only considered randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, publication status, or relevance of outcome measure) comparing local anaesthetic intraperitoneal instillation versus placebo, no intervention, or inactive control during laparoscopic cholecystectomy, for the review. We excluded non-randomised studies, and studies where the method of allocating participants to a treatment was not strictly random (e.g. date of birth, hospital record number, or alternation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected the data independently. Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, pain, return to activity and work, and non-serious adverse events. The analysis included both fixed-effect and random-effects models using RevManWeb. We performed subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses. For each outcome, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risk of bias using predefined domains, graded the certainty of the evidence using GRADE, and presented outcome results in a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-five completed trials were included, of which 76 trials contributed data to one or more of the outcomes. This included a total of 4957 participants randomised to intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation (2803 participants) and control (2154 participants). Most trials only included participants undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy and those who were at low anaesthetic risk (ASA I and II). The most commonly used local anaesthetic agent was bupivacaine. Methods of instilling the local anaesthetic varied considerably between trials; this included location and timing of application. The control groups received 0.9% normal saline (69 trials), no intervention (six trials), or sterile water (two trials). One trial did not specify the control agent used. None of the trials provided information on follow-up beyond point of discharge from hospital. Only two trials were at low risk of bias. Seven trials received external funding, of these three were assessed to be at risk of conflicts of interest, a further 17 trials declared no funding. We are very uncertain about the effect intraperitoneal local anaesthetic versus control on mortality; zero mortalities in either group (8 trials; 446 participants; very low-certainty evidence); serious adverse events (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.49 to 2.34); 13 trials; 988 participants; discharge on same day of surgery (RR 1.43; 95% CI 0.64 to 3.20; 3 trials; 242 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found that intraperitoneal local anaesthetic probably results in a small reduction in length of hospital stay (MD -0.10 days; 95% CI -0.18 to -0.01; 12 trials; 936 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on health-related quality of life, return to normal activity or return to work. Pain scores, as measured by visual analogue scale (VAS), were lower in the intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation group compared to the control group at both four to eight hours (MD -0.99 cm VAS; 95% CI -1.19 to -0.79; 57 trials; 4046 participants; low-certainty of evidence) and nine to 24 hours (MD -0.68 cm VAS; 95% CI -0.88 to -0.49; 52 trials; 3588 participants; low-certainty of evidence). In addition, we found two trials that were still ongoing, and one trial that was completed but with no published results. All three trials are registered on the WHO trial register.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are very uncertain about the effect estimate of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic for laparoscopic cholecystectomy on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and proportion of patients discharged on the same day of surgery because the certainty of evidence was very low. Due to inadequate reporting, we cannot exclude an increase in adverse events. We found that intraperitoneal local anaesthetic probably results in a small reduction in length of stay in hospital after surgery. We found that intraperitoneal local anaesthetic may reduce pain at up to 24 hours for low-risk patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Future randomised clinical trials should be at low risk of systematic and random errors, should fully report mortality and side effects, and should focus on clinical outcomes such as quality of life.

Intraperitoneal Levobupivacaine with or without Clonidine for Pain Relief after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Irrigation of local anesthetic intraperitoneally in combination with opioids and non-opioids agents has been used to provide pain relief with varying success in laparoscopic surgeries. This randomized double blind placebo controlled study is designed to study the effect of intraperitoneal instillation of levo-bupivacaine along with clonidine for pain relief after laparascopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

75 patients were randomized to receive 20 ml of 0.9% normal saline as placebo (group I), 20 ml of 0.5% levo bupivacaine (group II) and 20 ml of 0.5% levo bupivacaine with 1mcg/kg clonidine (group III) intraperitoneally. The degree of postoperative pain was assessed using the VAS and VRS on the immediate arrival in the recovery room after surgery and thereafter at 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours, postoperatively. Statistical analysis was performed with ANOVA, the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by the Wilcoxon matched pairs rank test was used and P < 0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

VAS was maximum in placebo (group I) than in levobupivacaine alone (group II) and was minimum in levobupivacaine with clonidine (group III) at all time intervals. The difference between group I and II is statistically significant at immediate and at 2 hours postoperatively but no difference were found between group I and II after 2 hour. However, there is statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) between group I and III and group II and III at all time intervals.

CONCLUSION

Intraperitoneal instillation of levobupivacaine along with clonidine in a dose of 1mcg/kg is superior to levobupivacaine alone without having any significant adverse effects.

Comparing the impact of intraperitoneal hydrocortisone with bupivacaine on postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background:

Postoperative pain is a major complaint following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to compare the impact of intraperitoneal hydrocortisone with intraperitoneal bupivacaine on pain relief after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Patients and Methods:

In a double blind clinical trial, 63 candidates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to receive intraperitoneal instillation of either 100 mg bupivacaine in 250 mL normal saline (n = 32) or 100 mg hydrocortisone in 250 mL normal saline (n = 31) before insufflation of CO₂ into the peritoneum for postoperative pain relief. Patients were investigated regarding abdominal and shoulder pain using (visual analog scale) VAS in recovery room and at 6, 12 and 24 hours postoperatively. Patients were also followed regarding postoperative analgesic requirements, nausea and vomiting, and return of bowel function.

Results:

Sixty patients completed the study. Patients in the hydrocortisone group had no statistically significant abdominal and shoulder pain scores compared to the bupivacaine group. The patients were similar regarding postoperative analgesic requirements, return of bowel function, nausea and vomiting. No adverse effect was detected in either group.

Conclusions:

Intraperitoneal administration of hydrocortisone is as effective as bupivacaine to reduce pain and analgesic requirements after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Post-Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Pain: Effects of Preincisional Infiltration and Intraperitoneal Levobupivacaine 0.25% on Pain Control-a Randomized Prospective Double-Blinded Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of preincisional and intraperitoneal levobupivacaine or normal saline in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

Sixty patients who participated in the study were randomly divided into 3 groups. Group 1 received intraperitoneal levobupivacaine (0.25% 40 mL) immediately after the pneumoperitoneum. Group 2 received periportal levobupivacaine (0.25% 5 mL in each trochar incision area) before incision and intraperitoneal levobupivacaine (0.25% 40 mL) immediately after the pneumoperitoneum. Group 3 received for periportal and intraperitoneal instillation of normal saline. The visual analog scale (VAS) at 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours for both shoulder and abdominal pain were recorded. Analgesia requirements and incidence of nausea and vomiting were also recorded.

RESULTS

There were no difference between the groups for demographic data. The pain scores were lower in Groups 1 and 2 than Group 3 (control) during rest, cough and movement (p<0.05). Rescue analgesic treatment was significantly lower in patients of Group 2 (15%) as compared with that of Groups 1 (35%) and 3 (90%) (p<0.05). The incidence of shoulder pain was significantly lower in Group 2 (25%) and Group 1 (20%) than in any of the control group patients (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results indicated that 0.25% levobupivacaine was effective in preventing pain and the need for postoperative analgesic when intraperitoneal instillation or preincisional local infiltration in combination with intraperitoneal instillation. However, levobupivacaine for preincisional local infiltration in combination with intraperitoneal instillation is the better choice because of its higher efficacy.

Intraperitoneal hydrocortisone for pain relief after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background:

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with shorter hospital stay and less pain in comparison to open surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of intraperitoneal hydrocortisone on pain relief following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods:

Sixty two patients were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. Patients randomly received intraperitoneal instillation of either 250 ml normal saline (n=31) or 100 mg hydrocortisone in 250 ml normal saline (n=31) before insufflation of CO₂ into the peritoneum. Abdominal and shoulder pain were evaluated using VAS after surgery and at 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively. The patients were also followed for postoperative analgesic requirements, nausea and vomiting, and return of bowel function.

Results:

Sixty patients completed the study. Patients in the hydrocortisone group had significantly lower abdominal and shoulder pain scores (10.95 vs 12.95; P<0.01). The patients were similar regarding analgesic requirements in the recovery room. However, those in the hydrocortisone group required less meperidine than the saline group (151.66 (±49.9) mg vs 61.66 (±38.69) mg; P=0.00). The patients were similar with respect to return of bowel function, nausea and vomiting. No adverse reaction was observed in either group.

Conclusion:

Intraperitoneal administration of hydrocortisone can significantly decrease pain and analgesic requirements after laparoscopic cholecystectomy with no adverse effects.

Multiple-, but not single-, dose of parecoxib reduces shoulder pain after gynecologic laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate effect of single- and multiple-dose of parecoxib on shoulder pain after gynecologic laparoscopy.

METHODS

126 patients requiring elective gynecologic laparoscopy were randomly allocated to three groups. Group M (multiple-dose): receiving parecoxib 40mg at 30min before the end of surgery, at 8 and 20hr after surgery, respectively; Group S (single-dose): receiving parecoxib 40mg at 30min before the end of surgery and normal saline at the corresponding time points; Group C (control): receiving normal saline at the same three time points. The shoulder pain was evaluated, both at rest and with motion, at postoperative 6, 24 and 48hr. The impact of shoulder pain on patients' recovery (activity, mood, walking and sleep) was also evaluated. Meanwhile, rescue analgesics and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of shoulder pain in group M (37.5%) was lower than that in group C (61.9%) (difference=-24.4%; 95% CI: 3.4~45.4%; P=0.023). Whereas, single-dose regimen (61.0%) showed no significant reduction (difference with control=-0.9%; 95% CI: -21.9~20.0%; P=0.931). Moreover, multiple-dose regimen reduced the maximal intensity of shoulder pain and the impact for activity and mood in comparison to the control. Multiple-dose of parecoxib decreased the consumption of rescue analgesics. The complications were similar among all groups and no severe complications were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple-, but not single-, dose of parecoxib may attenuate the incidence and intensity of shoulder pain and thereby improve patients' quality of recovery following gynecologic laparoscopy.

Efficacy of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic techniques during laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a barrier to early discharge. Some studies have demonstrated that local anaesthetic (LA) washed over the liver and gallbladder decreases postoperative pain. In many patients pain is partially of diaphragmatic origin which may not be treated effectively by topical wash. This study assesses the efficacy of LA injected to the peritoneum of the right hemidiaphragm or topical wash with a control group.

METHODS

We performed a double-blind randomized sham controlled trial of 128 consecutive subjects who underwent elective LC. Patients received subcutaneous bupivacaine, a diaphragmatic injection of bupivacaine or sham, and topical wash over the liver/gallbladder with bupivacaine or sham depending upon allocation. The primary outcome was VAS pain scores on the ward. Secondary outcomes included VRS pain scores in theatre recovery, analgesic use, physiological observations, time to eating and ambulation, and successful day-case surgery.

RESULTS

Pain scores were significantly lower in both LA groups versus control in theatre recovery but only in the subperitoneal diaphragm injection group when the patients returned to the ward. Subperitoneal diaphragm injection was associated with a reduced time in theatre recovery (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraperitoneal techniques of LA during LC decrease postoperative pain and shorten time in theatre recovery. Injection of LA to the right hemidiaphragm is associated with lower pain scores for a longer period following LC than a previously validated wash technique.

Superiority of preemptive analgesia with intraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine before rather than after the creation of pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the optimal timing of preemptive analgesia with bupivacaine peritoneal instillation in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

METHODS

In this study, 120 patients qualified for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to four groups. Group A received 2 mg/kg of bupivacaine in 200 ml of normal saline before creation of pneumoperitoneum. Group B received 2 mg/kg of bupivacaine in 200 ml of normal saline after creation of pneumoperitoneum. Group C received 200 ml of normal saline before creation of pneumoperitoneum. Group D received 200 ml of normal saline after creation of pneumoperitoneum. Local wound infiltration with bupivacaine was used before skin incisions. The primary end points of the study were postoperative pain intensity on a visual analog scale and incidence of shoulder tip pain. The secondary end points included the latency of nurse-controlled analgesia activation, the analgesia request rate, and analgesic consumption.

RESULTS

Significantly lower visual analog scores were observed in group A versus groups C and B versus group D during the initial 48 and 24 h, respectively. The patients in group A versus group B reported significantly lower pain at 4 h (p < 0.001) and 8 h (p = 0.003) postoperatively, but the difference was not significant after 12, 24, and 48 h. None of the group A patients reported shoulder tip pain, whereas it was reported by 3 patients in group B, 6 patients in group C, and 7 patients in group D (p < 0.01). The latency of nurse-controlled analgesia activation was 426.8 +/-57.2 min in group A, as compared with 307 +/- 39.8 min in group B, 109.3 +/- 51 min in group C, and 109 +/- 46.5 min in group D (p < 0.001). A significantly lower analgesia request rate was observed in group A versus C, as compared with group B versus D, throughout the entire study period (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive analgesia with bupivacaine peritoneal instillation is much more effective for pain relief if used before creation of pneumoperitoneum. Although the effect of bupivacaine peritoneal instillation is also noticeable when used after creation of pneumoperitoneum, it confers significantly lower benefits.

[Levobupivacaine for regional anesthesia. A systematic review]

Levobupivacaine [S(-)bupivacaine], the levorotatory S-enantiomer of racemic bupivacaine, is commercially available in the U.S. and in most European countries. We performed a systematic review (MEDLINE database) and identified 88 articles on the clinical application of levobupivacaine in more than 3,000 patients. The use of levobupivacaine is described for epidural, caudal, and spinal anesthesia, for peripheral nerve blocks, for ophthalmic and dental anesthesia, for different pediatric indications and for intravenous regional anesthesia. In these regional techniques, levobupivacaine was used for all common indications in a wide range of clinical settings. Epidural levobupivacaine was combined with fentanyl, morphine, sufentanil, epinephrine, and clonidine, spinal levobupivacaine was combined with sufentanil, fentanyl, and epinephrine. In most studies, levobupivacaine was compared to bupivacaine and/or ropivacaine.