Systemic administration of lidocaine reduces morphine requirements and postoperative pain of patients undergoing thoracic surgery after propofol-remifentanil-based anaesthesia

Continuous ketamine infusion for the management of opioid-induced hyperalgesia following amputation

We discuss the use of an inpatient multi-day continuous intravenous ketamine infusion for the treatment of opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH) and high fentanyl requirements in the case of a patient with a background of fibromyalgia/central sensitisation syndrome who underwent a complicated post-operative course following a right below-knee amputation for high-grade myxoid fibrosarcoma. The patient was successfully tapered off a total fentanyl patch dose of 162 mcg/hour every 72 hours (morphine equivalent dose of 389 mg/day) to short-acting hydromorphone 2 mg orally two times per day as needed (equivalent of 8 mg morphine sustained-release twice per day) during a 2-week admission with only mild withdrawal symptoms. We discuss the pharmacology of ketamine and its possible application in the treatment of OIH.

The Use of Intravenous Lidocaine in Perioperative Medicine: Anaesthetic, Analgesic and Immune-Modulatory Aspects

This narrative review provides an update on the applied pharmacology of lidocaine, its clinical scope in anaesthesia, novel concepts of analgesic and immune-modulatory effects as well as the current controversy around its use in perioperative opioid-sparing multi-modal strategies. Potential benefits of intravenous lidocaine in the context of cancer, inflammation and chronic pain are discussed against concerns of safety, toxicity and medico-legal constraints.

Regional anesthesia and acute perioperative pain management in thoracic surgery: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Thoracic surgery causes significant pain which can negatively affect pulmonary function and increase risk of postoperative complications. Effective analgesia is important to reduce splinting and atelectasis. Systemic opioids and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) have been used for decades and are effective at treating acute post-thoracotomy pain, although both have risks and adverse effects. The advancement of thoracoscopic surgery, a focus on multimodal and opioid-sparing analgesics, and the development of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia techniques have greatly expanded the options for acute pain management after thoracic surgery. Despite the expansion of surgical techniques and analgesic approaches, there is no clear optimal approach to pain management. This review aims to summarize the body of literature regarding systemic and regional anesthetic techniques for thoracic surgery in both thoracotomy and minimally invasive approaches, with a goal of providing a foundation for providers to make individualized decisions for patients depending on surgical approach and patient factors, and to discuss avenues for future research.

Methods

We searched PubMed and Google Scholar databases from inception to May 2021 using the terms “thoracic surgery”, “thoracic surgery AND pain management”, “thoracic surgery AND analgesia”, “thoracic surgery AND regional anesthesia”, “thoracic surgery AND epidural”. We considered articles written in English and available to the reader.

Key Content and Findings

There is a wide variety of strategies for treating acute pain after thoracic surgery, including multimodal opioid and non-opioid systemic analgesics, regional anesthesia including TEA and paravertebral blocks (PVB), and a recent expansion in the use of novel fascial plane blocks especially for thoracoscopy. The body of literature on the effectiveness of different approaches for thoracotomy and thoracoscopy is a rapidly expanding field and area of active debate.

Conclusions

The optimal analgesic approach for thoracic surgery may depend on patient factors, surgical factors, and institutional factors. Although TEA may provide optimal analgesia after thoracotomy, PVB and emerging fascial plane blocks may offer effective alternatives. A tailored approach using multimodal systemic therapies and regional anesthesia is important, and future studies comparing techniques are necessary to further investigate the optimal approach to improve patient outcomes.

Management of Postoperative Pain in Patients Following Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review

Perioperative pain management is a unique challenge in patients undergoing spine surgery due to the increased incidence of both pre-existing chronic pain conditions and chronic postsurgical pain. Peri-operative planning and counseling in spine surgery should involve an interdisciplinary approach that includes consideration of patient-level risk factors, as well as pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic pain management techniques. Consideration of psychological factors and patient focused education as an adjunct to these measures is paramount in developing a personalized perioperative pain management plan. Understanding the currently available body of knowledge surrounding perioperative opioid management, management of opioid use disorder, regional/neuraxial anesthetic techniques, ketamine/lidocaine infusions, non-opioid oral analgesics, and behavioral interventions can be useful in developing a comprehensive, multi-modal treatment plan among patients undergoing spine surgery. Although many of these techniques have proved efficacious in the immediate postoperative period, long-term follow-up is needed to define the impact of such approaches on persistent pain and opioid use. Future techniques involving the use of precision medicine may help identify phenotypic and physiologic characteristics that can identify patients that are most at risk of developing persistent postoperative pain after spine surgery.

Recommendations of the Society of Thoracic Surgery and the Section of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery of the Spanish Society of Anesthesia, Resuscitation and Pain Therapy, for patients undergoing lung surgery included in an intensified recovery program

In recent years, multidisciplinary programs have been implemented that include different actions during the pre, intra and postoperative period, aimed at reducing perioperative stress and therefore improving the results of patients undergoing surgical interventions. Initially, these programs were developed for colorectal surgery and from there they have been extended to other surgeries. Thoracic surgery, considered highly complex, like other surgeries with a high postoperative morbidity and mortality rate, may be one of the specialties that most benefit from the implementation of these programs. This review presents the recommendations made by different specialties involved in the perioperative care of patients who require resection of a lung tumor. Meta-analyzes, systematic reviews, randomized and non-randomized controlled studies, and retrospective studies conducted in patients undergoing this type of intervention have been taken into account in preparing the recommendations presented in this guide. The GRADE scale has been used to classify the recommendations, assessing on the one hand the level of evidence published on each specific aspect and, on the other hand, the strength of the recommendation with which the authors propose its application. The recommendations considered most important for this type of surgery are those that refer to pre-habilitation, minimization of surgical aggression, excellence in the management of perioperative pain and postoperative care aimed at providing rapid postoperative rehabilitation.

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.

Effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Techniques using local anaesthetics provide high-quality analgesia, while the anti-inflammatory properties of these drugs may represent an additional advantage. Perioperative intravenous lidocaine has shown positive effects not only on postoperative pain but also on bowel function and duration of hospital stay, due to its analgesic, anti-inflammatory and opioid-sparing effects. However, these potential benefits are not well established in patients undergoing resection with colorectal cancer. This research aims to determine the effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, SinoMed and WanFang Data databases were electronically retrieved to include the randomised controlled trials comparing perioperative intravenous lidocaine with placebo infusion in patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer before August 2021. Registers of clinical trials, potential grey literature and abstracts from conferences will also be searched. Two reviewers will screen literature, extract data and assess risk of bias of studies included independently. The primary outcome variable will be long-term survival outcome, tumour recurrence and metastasis rate, and restoration of intestinal function. The secondary outcome variables will consist of the severity of postoperative pain at 4, 12, 24 and 48 hours after surgery, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and the length of hospital stay. A meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan V.5.4 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and Stata V.12.0. subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Because the data used for this systematic review will be exclusively extracted from published studies, ethical approval and informed consent of patients will not be required. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at conferences and shared on social media platforms.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020216232.

Recommendations of the Society of Thoracic Surgery and the Section of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery of the Spanish Society of Anesthesia, Resuscitation and Pain Therapy, for patients undergoing lung surgery included in an intensified recovery program

In recent years, multidisciplinary programs have been implemented that include different actions during the pre, intra and postoperative period, aimed at reducing perioperative stress and therefore improving the results of patients undergoing surgical interventions. Initially, these programs were developed for colorectal surgery and from there they have been extended to other surgeries. Thoracic surgery, considered highly complex, like other surgeries with a high postoperative morbidity and mortality rate, may be one of the specialties that most benefit from the implementation of these programs. This review presents the recommendations made by different specialties involved in the perioperative care of patients who require resection of a lung tumor. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized and non-randomized controlled studies, and retrospective studies conducted in patients undergoing this type of intervention have been taken into account in preparing the recommendations presented in this guide. The GRADE scale has been used to classify the recommendations, assessing on the one hand the level of evidence published on each specific aspect and, on the other hand, the strength of the recommendation with which the authors propose its application. The recommendations considered most important for this type of surgery are those that refer to pre-habilitation, minimization of surgical aggression, excellence in the management of perioperative pain and postoperative care aimed at providing rapid postoperative rehabilitation.

The Effect of Lidocaine on Postoperative Quality of Recovery and Lung Protection of Patients Undergoing Thoracoscopic Radical Resection of Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of lidocaine on postoperative quality of recovery and lung protection of patients undergoing thoracoscopic radical resection of lung cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy ASA II-III patients undergoing thoracoscopic radical resection of lung cancer were randomly assigned into either the lidocaine group (Group L) or control group (Group C). Patients in Group L received lidocaine with a 1.5 mg/kg bolus before induction of anesthesia, followed by 2.0 mg/kg/h until the end of the operation while the patients in Group C received volume-matched normal saline at the same rate. The main outcome was the quality of recovery-40 score (QoR-40 score) at 24 h postoperatively. The peak airway pressure (Ppeak) and plateau airway pressure (Pplat), the partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (PaO2), partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood (PaCO2), alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient (A-aDO2), oxygenation index (OI), time to first flatus and defecation, intraoperative hemodynamics and opioid consumption were also recorded.

RESULTS

There were no statistically difference at patients' baseline characteristics. The QoR-40 score of Group L was significantly higher than that of Group C at 24 h after surgery (P=0.014). Ppeak, Pplat, and A-aDO2 of Group L were significantly lower than those of Group C (P<0.001, P<0.001, P=0.025, respectively) after the ventilation recovery of both lungs, and the PaO2 and OI of the Group L were significantly higher than those of Group C (P=0.027, P=0.027, respectively). Time to first flatus and defecation in Group L was significantly lower compared with Group C (P=0.037, P=0.025, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous lidocaine can improve the quality of recovery of patients undergoing thoracoscopic radical resection of lung cancer, while also providing lung protection, favorable postoperative analgesia, a reduction in the time to first flatus and defecation after surgery.

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on short-term pain after hysteroscopy: a randomized clinical trial

Background

The role of intravenous lidocaine infusion in endoscopic surgery has been previously evaluated for pain relief and recovery. Recently, it has been shown to reduce postoperative pain and opioid in patients undergoing endoscopic submucosal dissection. Similar to endoscopic submucosal dissection, operative hysteroscopy is also an endoscopic surgical procedure within natural lumens. The present study was a randomized clinical trial in which we evaluated whether intravenous lidocaine infusion would reduce postoperative pain in patients undergoing hysteroscopic surgery.

Objective

To evaluate whether intravenous lidocaine infusion could reduce postoperative pain in patients undergoing operative hysteroscopy.

Methods

Eighty-five patients scheduled to undergo elective hysteroscopy were randomized to receive either an intravenous bolus of lidocaine 1.5 mg.kg^-1 over 3 minutes, followed by continuous infusion at a rate of 2 mg.kg^-1. h^-1 during surgery, or 0.9% normal saline solution at the same rate. The primary outcome was to evaluate postoperative pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included remifentanil and propofol consumption.

Results

In the lidocaine group, the VAS was significantly lower at 0.5 hour (p = 0.008) and 4 hours (p = 0.020). Patients in the lidocaine group required less remifentanil than patients in the control group (p < 0.001). However, there was no difference between the two groups in the propofol consumption. The incidence of throat pain was significantly lower in the lidocaine group (p = 0.019). No adverse events associated with lidocaine infusion were discovered.

Conclusion

Intravenous lidocaine infusion as an adjuvant reduces short-term postoperative pain in patients undergoing operative hysteroscopy.

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.

Intravenous lidocaine as a non-opioid adjunct analgesic for traumatic rib fractures

INTRODUCTION

Pain management is the pillar of caring for patients with traumatic rib fractures. Intravenous lidocaine (IVL) is a well-established non-opioid analgesic for post-operative pain, yet its efficacy has yet to be investigated in trauma patients. We hypothesized that IVL is associated with decreased inpatient opioid requirements among patients with rib fractures.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated adult patients presenting to our Level 1 trauma center with isolated chest wall injuries. After 1:1 propensity score matching patients who received vs did not receive IVL, we compared the two groups' average daily opioid use, opioid use in the last 24 hours of admission, and pain scores during admissions hours 24-48. We performed multivariable linear regression for these outcomes (with sensitivity analysis for the opioid use outcomes), adjusting for age as a moderating factor and controlling for hospital length of stay and injury severity.

RESULTS

We identified 534 patients, among whom 226 received IVL. Those who received IVL were older and had more serious injury. Compared to propensity-score matched patients who did not receive IVL, patients who received IVL had similar average daily opioid use and pain scores, but 40% lower opioid use during the last 24 hours of admission (p = 0.002). Multivariable regression-with and without sensitivity analysis-did not show an effect of IVL on any outcomes.

CONCLUSION

IVL was crudely associated with decreased opioid requirements in the last 24 hours of admission, the time period associated with opioid use at 90 days post-discharge. However, we did not observe beneficial effects of IVL on multivariable adjusted analyses; we are conducting a randomized control trial to further evaluate IVL's opioid-sparing effects for patients with rib fractures.

Association Between Disease Severity, Heart Rate Variability (HRV) and Serum Cortisol Concentrations in Horses with Acute Abdominal Pain

Simple Summary

Acute abdominal pain is a major cause for emergency treatment in horses and associated with a high stress level leading to an increased serum cortisol concentration. Stress can also be assessed by analyzing the heart rate variability (HRV). We investigated whether the stress level was different between horses with different causes of abdominal pain and, therefore, demanding a different treatment strategy. Heart rate, its variability in the time domain analyses, and cortisol level indicated a decrease in the stress level the day after admission and the day of discharge from the hospital in comparison to admission for both conservatively and surgically treated patients. However, such changes, over time, were not seen in horses that were euthanized during the hospitalization. Furthermore, the difference in the parameters measured between horses that were eventually euthanized and those that survived was best visible the day after admission. Therefore, we concluded that HRV can give further important information on the stress level in horses with colic and might be helpful in assessing possible outcome. However, further studies are required to assess the validity of HRV analyses in horses with colic.

Abstract

Heart rate variability (HRV) is a noninvasive technique to detect changes in the autonomous nervous system. It has rarely been investigated in horses with colic. Therefore, the objective was to assess the evolution of HRV parameters and cortisol concentrations in horses with colic. The 43 horses included in this study were categorized into three groups according to the treatment (1, surgical; 2, conservative; 3, euthanized). The HRV and laboratory variables were measured at admission (T1), the day after admission (T2), and at discharge (T3) and compared between groups and over time with an ANOVA with Bonferroni correction. Relationships between the HRV parameters themselves and the laboratory variables was assessed by Pearson correlation coefficients. Evolution of the heart rate (HR) over time, mean normal to normal R intervals (meanNN) and cortisol concentrations indicate a decreased sympathetic stimulation over time in group 1 and 2, in contrast to group 3. For group 3, the meanNN and HR differed significantly to group 2 at T1 and to group 1 and 2 at T2. Treatment induced a change in the HRV and cortisol response in horses managed conservatively or surgically but not in horses that required euthanasia. However, further studies are required to assess the validity of HRV analyses in horses with colic.

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.

Evaluation of opioid requirements in the management of renal colic after guideline implementation in the emergency department

PURPOSE

Evaluate opioid prescribing before and after emergency department (ED) renal colic guideline implementation focused on multi-modal pain management.

METHODS

Retrospective study of ED patients who received analgesia for urolithiasis before and after guideline implementation. The guideline recommends oral acetaminophen, intravenous (IV) ketorolac, and a fluid bolus as first line, IV lidocaine as second line, and opioids as refractory therapy to control pain. Opioid exposure, adverse effects, length of stay (LOS), and ED representation were evaluated. Comparisons were made with univariate analyses. Backwards stepwise binomial multivariate logistic regression to identify factors related to opioid use was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 962 patients were included (451 pre- and 511 post-implementation). ED and discharge opioid use decreased; 65% vs. 58% and 71% vs. 63% in pre- and post-implementation groups, respectively. More post-implementation patients received non-opioid analgesia (65% vs. 56%) and non-opioid analgesia prior to opioids (50% vs. 38%). A longer ED LOS and higher initial pain score were associated with ED opioid administration. Guideline implementation, receiving non-opioid therapy first, and first renal colic episode were associated with decreased ED opioid administration. Seventeen adverse events (1.8%) were reported. There was no difference in change in ED pain score between groups, but patients in the post-implementation group were admitted more and had a higher 7-day ED representation (11% vs. 7%).

CONCLUSIONS

A multimodal analgesia protocol for renal colic was associated with decreased opioid prescribing, higher rates of admission to the hospital, and a higher 7-day ED representation rate.

Effect of intraoperative paravertebral or intravenous lidocaine versus control during lung resection surgery on postoperative complications: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Use of minimally invasive surgical techniques for lung resection surgery (LRS), such as video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS), has increased in recent years. However, there is little information about the best anesthetic technique in this context. This surgical approach is associated with a lower intensity of postoperative pain, and its use has been proposed in programs for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). This study compares the severity of postoperative complications in patients undergoing LRS who have received lidocaine intraoperatively either intravenously or via paravertebral administration versus saline.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will conduct a single-center randomized controlled trial involving 153 patients undergoing LRS through a thoracoscopic approach. The patients will be randomly assigned to one of the following study groups: intravenous lidocaine with more paravertebral thoracic (PVT) saline, PVT lidocaine with more intravenous saline, or intravenous remifentanil with more PVT saline. The primary outcome will be the comparison of the postoperative course through Clavien-Dindo classification. Furthermore, we will compare the perioperative pulmonary and systemic inflammatory response by monitoring biomarkers in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and blood, as well as postoperative analgesic consumption between the three groups of patients. We will use an ANOVA to compare quantitative variables and a chi-squared test to compare qualitative variables.

DISCUSSION

The development of less invasive surgical techniques means that anesthesiologists must adapt their perioperative management protocols and look for anesthetic techniques that provide good analgesic quality and allow rapid rehabilitation of the patient, as proposed in the ERAS protocols. The administration of a continuous infusion of intravenous lidocaine has proven to be useful and safe for the management of other types of surgery, as demonstrated in colorectal cancer. We want to know whether the continuous administration of lidocaine by a paravertebral route can be substituted with the intravenous administration of this local anesthetic in a safe and effective way while avoiding the risks inherent in the use of regional anesthetic techniques. In this way, this technique could be used in a safe and effective way in ERAS programs for pulmonary resection.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT, 2016-004271-52; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03905837 . Protocol number IGGFGG-2016 version 4.0, 27th April 2017.

Evaluation of intravenous lidocaine in head and neck cancer surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pain after major head and neck cancer surgery is underestimated and has both nociceptive and neuropathic characteristics. Extended resection, flap coverage, nerve lesions, inflammation, and high-dose opioid administration can also lead to hyperalgesia and chronic postoperative pain. Opioids are frequently associated with adverse events such as dizziness, drowsiness, nausea and vomiting, or constipation disturbing postoperative recovery and extending the length of hospital stay. Patients eligible for major head and neck cancer surgery cannot benefit from full multimodal pain management with locoregional anesthesia. Intravenous lidocaine, investigated in several studies, has been found to decrease acute pain and morphine consumption. Some data suggest also that it can prevent chronic postsurgical pain. Evidence supporting its use varies between surgical procedures, and there is no published study regarding systemic lidocaine administration in major head and neck cancer surgery. We hypothesized that intravenous lidocaine infused in the perioperative period would lead to opioid sparing and chronic postsurgical pain reduction.

METHODS/DESIGN

A total of 128 patients undergoing major head and neck surgery will be included in this prospective two-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Patients will be randomly assigned to lidocaine or placebo treatment. After induction of general anesthesia, an intravenous lidocaine bolus will be administered (1.5 mg.kg^- 1), followed by a continuous infusion (2 mg.kg^- 1.h^- 1) which will be reduced in the postanesthesia care unit (1 mg.kg^- 1.h^- 1). The primary outcome measure is morphine consumption 48 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes include intraoperative remifentanil consumption, morphine consumption 24 h after surgery, and chronic postsurgical pain that will be assessed 3-6 months after surgery.

DISCUSSION

Recent evidence suggests that intravenous lidocaine can lead to opioid sparing and chronic postsurgical pain reduction for certain types of surgery. This is the first trial to prospectively investigate the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine in major head and neck cancer surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02894710 . Registered on 11 August 2016.

The increased release of amino acid neurotransmitters of the primary somatosensory cortical area in rats contributes to remifentanil-induced hyperalgesia and its inhibition by lidocaine

Background

Studies have confirmed that activation of the neurons of primary somatosensory cortex (S1) is involved in the process of remifentanil (Remi)-induced hyperalgesia (RIH), which can be suppressed by lidocaine (Lido). A total intravenous anesthesia model of rats mimicking clinical Remi-based anesthesia was set up to explore the release of amino acid neurotransmitters of S1 cortex in RIH and its inhibition by Lido in this study.

Materials and methods

Sprague Dawley rats were randomly divided into the following four groups: propofol (Pro), Remi, Remi combined Lido, and Lido groups. Mechanical hyperalgesia was evaluated by von Frey test; the amino acid neurotransmitters in the microdialysates of S1 area were detected by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-fluorescence, and conventional protein kinase C (cPKC)γ levels in the whole-cell lysates and membrane lipid rafts (MLRs) were determined by Western blotting.

Results

The von Frey test showed that co-administration of Lido significantly inhibited a Remi-induced decrease in the threshold of the paw withdrawal response in Remi group at 2 h postinfusion. Meanwhile, the Remi-induced increases in both the excitatory and inhibitory amino acid releases in S1 were suppressed by co-administrating Lido within 5 h postinfusion. Western blotting showed that the increased cPKCγ level in the membrane lipid rafts (MLR) induced by Remi was also inhibited by Lido.

Conclusion

The increased release of amino acid neurotransmitters and the translocation of cPKCγ in MLR suggest the activation of S1 neurons, which may be one of the mechanisms underlying RIH. Lido reduces the release of amino acid neurotransmitters in S1 neurons and the translocation of cPKCγ in MLRs after stopping Remi, which may be one of its antihyperalgesic mechanisms.

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.

Anesthesia and fast-track in video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS): from evidence to practice

In thoracic surgery, the introduction of video-assisted thoracoscopic techniques has allowed the development of fast-track protocols, with shorter hospital lengths of stay and improved outcomes. The perioperative management needs to be optimized accordingly, with the goal of reducing postoperative complications and speeding recovery times. Premedication performed in the operative room should be wisely administered because often linked to late discharge from the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Inhalatory anesthesia, when possible, should be preferred based on protective effects on postoperative lung inflammation. Deep neuromuscular blockade should be pursued and carefully monitored, and an appropriate reversal administered before extubation. Management of one-lung ventilation (OLV) needs to be optimized to prevent not only intraoperative hypoxemia but also postoperative acute lung injury (ALI): protective ventilation strategies are therefore to be implemented. Locoregional techniques should be favored over intravenous analgesia: the thoracic epidural, the paravertebral block (PVB), the intercostal nerve block (ICNB), and the serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) are thoroughly reviewed and the most common dosages are reported. Fluid therapy needs to be administered critically, to avoid both overload and cardiovascular compromisation. All these practices are analyzed singularly with the aid of the most recent evidences aimed at the best patient care. Finally, a few notes on some of the latest trends in research are presented, such as non-intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and intravenous lidocaine.

Enhanced recovery pathways in thoracic surgery from Italian VATS Group: perioperative analgesia protocols

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is a minimally invasive technique that allows a faster recovery after thoracic surgery. Although enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) principles seem reasonably applicable to thoracic surgery, there is little literature on the application of such a strategy in this context. In regard to pain management, ERAS pathways promote the adoption of a multimodal strategy, tailored to the patients. This approach is based on combining systemic and loco-regional analgesia to favour opioid-sparing strategies. Thoracic paravertebral block is considered the first-line loco-regional technique for VATS. Other techniques include intercostal nerve block and serratus anterior plane block. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and paracetamol are essential part of the multimodal treatment of pain. Also, adjuvant drugs can be useful as opioid-sparing agents. Nevertheless, the treatment of postoperative pain must take into account opioid agents too, if necessary. All above is useful for careful planning and execution of a multimodal analgesic treatment to enhance the recovery of patients. This article summarizes the most recent evidences from literature and authors' experiences on perioperative multimodal analgesia principles for implementing an ERAS program after VATS lobectomy.

Intravenous lidocaine infusion

Systemic lidocaine used in continuous infusion during the peri-operative period has analgesic, anti-hyperalgesic, as well as anti-inflammatory properties. This makes it capable of reducing the use of opioids and inhalational anaesthetics, and the early return of bowel function, and patient hospital stay. The aim of this narrative review was to highlight the pharmacology and indications for clinical application, along with new and interesting research areas. The clinical applications of peri-operative lidocaine infusion have been reviewed in several recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses in patients undergoing open and laparoscopic abdominal procedures, ambulatory procedures, and other types of surgery. Peri-operative lidocaine infusion may be a useful analgesic adjunct in enhanced recovery protocols. Potential benefits of intravenous lidocaine in chronic post-surgical pain, post-operative cognitive dysfunction, and cancer recurrence are under investigation. Due to its immunomodulation properties over surgical stress, current evidence suggests that intravenous lidocaine could be used in the context of multimodal analgesia.

Lidocaine alleviates morphine tolerance via AMPK-SOCS3-dependent neuroinflammation suppression in the spinal cord

Background

Morphine tolerance is a clinical challenge, and its pathogenesis is closely related to the neuroinflammation mediated by Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4). In Chinese pain clinic, lidocaine is combined with morphine to treat chronic pain. We found that lidocaine sufficiently inhibited neuroinflammation induced by morphine and improved analgesic tolerance on the basis of non-affecting pain threshold.

Methods

CD-1 mice were utilized for tail-flick test to evaluate morphine tolerance. The microglial cell line BV-2 was utilized to investigate the mechanism of lidocaine. Neuroinflammation-related cytokines were measured by western blotting and real-time PCR. The level of suppressor of cytokine signaling 3 (SOCS3) and adenosine 5′-monophosphate (AMP)-activated protein kinase (AMPK)-related signaling pathway was evaluated by western blotting, real-time PCR, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and immunofluorescence staining.

Results

Lidocaine potentiated an anti-nociceptive effect of morphine and attenuated the chronic analgesic tolerance. Lidocaine suppressed morphine-induced activation of microglia and downregulated inflammatory cytokines, interleukin-1β (IL-1β), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) via upregulating SOCS3 by activating AMPK. Lidocaine enhanced AMPK phosphorylation in a calcium-dependent protein kinase kinase β (CaMKKβ)-dependent manner. Furthermore, lidocaine decreased the phosphorylation of p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and inhibited the nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) in accordance with the inhibitory effects to TLR4.

Conclusions

Lidocaine as a prevalent local anesthetic suppresses morphine tolerance efficiently. AMPK-dependent upregulation of SOCS3 by lidocaine plays a crucial role in the improvement of analgesic tolerance.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12974-017-0983-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevention of Surgical Site Infections and Biofilms: Pharmacokinetics of Subcutaneous Cefazolin and Metronidazole in a Tumescent Lidocaine Solution

BACKGROUND

Tumescent anesthesia antibiotic delivery (TAAD) consists of subcutaneous infiltration of antibiotic(s) dissolved tumescent lidocaine anesthesia. Tumescent lidocaine anesthesia contains lidocaine (≤ 1 g/L), epinephrine (≤ 1 mg/L), sodium bicarbonate (10 mEq/L) in 0.9% saline. Our aim was to measure cefazolin and metronidazole concentrations over time in subcutaneous tumescent interstitial fluid (TISF) after TAAD, in serum after TAAD and after intravenous antibiotic delivery (IVAD). We hypothesize that the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles of TAAD + IVAD are superior to IVAD alone for the prevention of surgical site infections and biofilms.

METHODS

Concentrations of cefazolin and metronidazole in TISF and serum following TAAD and in serum following IVAD were compared in 5 female volunteers. Subjects received cefazolin or cefazolin plus metronidazole by IVAD alone and by TAAD alone. One subject also received concomitant IVAD and TAAD of these 2 antibiotics. Sequential samples of serum or subcutaneous TISF were assayed for antibiotic concentration.

RESULTS

Cefazolin (1 g) by TAAD resulted in an area under the curve of the concentration-time profile and a maximum concentration (Cmax) in subcutaneous tissue that were 16.5 and 5.6 times greater than in serum following 1 g by IVAD. Metronidazole (500 mg) by TAAD resulted in an area under the curve and Cmax that were 8.1 and 24.7 times greater in TISF, than in serum after 500 mg by intravenous delivery. IVAD + TAAD resulted in superior antibiotic concentrations to IVAD alone.

CONCLUSIONS

TAAD + IVAD produced superior antibiotic bioavailability in both subcutaneous interstitial fluid and serum compared with IVAD alone. There was no evidence that TAAD of cefazolin and metronidazole poses a significant risk of harm to patients.

Perioperative Use of Intravenous Lidocaine

Perioperative lidocaine infusion improves analgesia and recovery after some surgical procedures, possibly through systemic antiinflammatory effects. This commentary provides the clinician with evidence for rational use of perioperative lidocaine infusion in procedures where it is of demonstrated benefit.

Lidocaine Infusion: A Promising Therapeutic Approach for Chronic Pain

Opioid abuse is a national epidemic in the United States, where it is estimated that a prescription drug overdose death occurs every 19 minutes. While opioids are highly effective in acute and subacute pain control, their use for treatment of chronic pain is controversial. Chronic opioids use is associated with tolerance, dependency, hyperalgesia. Although there are new strategies and practice guidelines to reduce opioid dependence and opioid prescription drug overdose, there has been little focus on development of opioid-sparing therapeutic approaches. Lidocaine infusion has been shown to be successful in controlling pain where other agents have failed. The opioid sparing properties of lidocaine infusion added to its analgesic and antihyperalgesic properties make lidocaine infusion a viable option for pain control in opioid dependent patients. In this review, we provide an overview of the opioid abuse epidemic, and we outline current evidence supporting the potential use of lidocaine infusion as an adjuvant therapeutic approach for management of chronic pain.

A review of postoperative analgesia for breast cancer surgery

An online database search with subsequent article review was performed in order to review the various analgesic modalities for breast cancer surgery. Of 514 abstracts, 284 full-length manuscripts were reviewed. The effect of pharmacologic interventions is varied (NSAIDS, opioids, anticonvulsants, ketamine, lidocaine). Likewise, data from high-quality randomized, controlled studies on wound infiltration (including liposome encapsulated) and infusion of local anesthetic are minimal and conflicting. Conversely, abundant evidence demonstrates paravertebral blocks and thoracic epidural infusions provide effective analgesia and minimize opioid requirements, while decreasing opioid-related side effects in the immediate postoperative period. Other techniques with promising – but extremely limited – data include cervical epidural infusion, brachial plexus, interfascial plane and interpleural blocks. In conclusion, procedural interventions involving regional blocks are more conclusively effective than pharmacologic modalities in providing analgesia to patients following surgery for breast cancer.

Continuous intravenous perioperative lidocaine infusion for postoperative pain and recovery

BACKGROUND

The management of postoperative pain and recovery is still unsatisfactory in clinical practice. Opioids used for postoperative analgesia are frequently associated with adverse effects including nausea and constipation. These adverse effects prevent smooth postoperative recovery. On the other hand not all patients may be suited to, and take benefit from, epidural analgesia used to enhance postoperative recovery. The non-opioid lidocaine was investigated in several studies for its use in multi-modal management strategies to reduce postoperative pain and enhance recovery.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to assess the effects (benefits and risks) of perioperative intravenous 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 the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 5 2014), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2014), EMBASE (1980 to May 2014), CINAHL (1982 to May 2014), and reference lists of articles. We searched the trial registry database ClinicalTrials.gov, contacted researchers in the field, and handsearched journals and congress proceedings. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was independently assessed by two authors according to the methodological procedures specified by the Cochrane Collaboration. Data were extracted by two independent authors. We collected trial data on postoperative pain, recovery of gastrointestinal function, length of hospital stay, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, surgical complication rates, and adverse effects of the intervention.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 45 trials involving 2802 participants. Two trials compared intravenous lidocaine versus epidural analgesia. In all the remaining trials placebo or no treatment was used as a comparator. Trials involved participants undergoing open abdominal (12), laparoscopic abdominal (13), or various other surgical procedures (20).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.We found evidence of effect for intravenous lidocaine on the reduction of postoperative pain (visual analogue scale, 0 to 10 cm) compared to placebo or no treatment at 'early time points (one to four hours)' (mean difference (MD) -0.84 cm, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.10 to -0.59; low-quality evidence) and at 'intermediate time points (24 hours)' (MD -0.34 cm, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.11; low-quality evidence) after surgery. However, no evidence of effect was found for lidocaine to reduce pain at 'late time points (48 hours)' (MD -0.22 cm, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.03; low-quality evidence). Pain reduction was most obvious at 'early time points' in participants undergoing laparoscopic abdominal surgery (MD -1.14, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.78; low-quality evidence) and open abdominal surgery (MD -0.72, 95% CI -0.96 to -0.47; moderate-quality evidence). No evidence of effect was found for lidocaine to reduce pain in participants undergoing all other surgeries (MD -0.30, 95% CI -0.89 to 0.28; low-quality evidence). Quality of evidence is limited due to inconsistency and indirectness (small trial sizes).Evidence of effect was found for lidocaine on gastrointestinal recovery regarding the reduction of the time to first flatus (MD -5.49 hours, 95% CI -7.97 to -3.00; low-quality evidence), time to first bowel movement (MD -6.12 hours, 95% CI -7.36 to -4.89; low-quality evidence), and the risk of paralytic ileus (risk ratio (RR) 0.38, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.99; low-quality evidence). However, no evidence of effect was found for lidocaine on shortening the time to first defaecation (MD -9.52 hours, 95% CI -23.24 to 4.19; very low-quality evidence).Furthermore, we found evidence of positive effects for lidocaine administration on secondary outcomes such as reduction of length of hospital stay, postoperative nausea, intraoperative and postoperative opioid requirements. There was limited data on the effect of IV lidocaine on adverse effects (e.g. death, arrhythmias, other heart rate disorders or signs of lidocaine toxicity) compared to placebo treatment as only a limited number of studies systematically analysed the occurrence of adverse effects of the lidocaine intervention.The comparison of intravenous lidocaine versus epidural analgesia revealed no evidence of effect for lidocaine on relevant outcomes. However, the results have to be considered with caution due to imprecision of the effect estimates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low to moderate evidence that this intervention, when compared to placebo, has an impact on pain scores, especially in the early postoperative phase, and on postoperative nausea. There is limited evidence that this has further impact on other relevant clinical outcomes, such as gastrointestinal recovery, length of hospital stay, and opioid requirements. So far there is a scarcity of studies that have systematically assessed the incidence of adverse effects; the optimal dose; timing (including the duration of the administration); and the effects when compared with epidural anaesthesia.

Comparison of the efficacy of saline, local anesthetics, and steroids in epidural and facet joint injections for the management of spinal pain: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of epidural and facet joint injections has been assessed utilizing multiple solutions including saline, local anesthetic, steroids, and others. The responses to these various solutions have been variable and have not been systematically assessed with long-term follow-ups.

METHODS

Randomized trials utilizing a true active control design were included. The primary outcome measure was pain relief and the secondary outcome measure was functional improvement. The quality of each individual article was assessed by Cochrane review criteria, as well as the criteria developed by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) for assessing interventional techniques. An evidence analysis was conducted based on the qualitative level of evidence (Level I to IV).

RESULTS

A total of 31 trials met the inclusion criteria. There was Level I evidence that local anesthetic with steroids was effective in managing chronic spinal pain based on multiple high-quality randomized controlled trials. The evidence also showed that local anesthetic with steroids and local anesthetic alone were equally effective except in disc herniation, where the superiority of local anesthetic with steroids was demonstrated over local anesthetic alone.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review showed equal efficacy for local anesthetic with steroids and local anesthetic alone in multiple spinal conditions except for disc herniation where the superiority of local anesthetic with steroids was seen over local anesthetic alone.

[Effect of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine on pain and plasma interleukin-6 in patients undergoing hysterectomy]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is a predictor of trauma severity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of intravenous lidocaine on pain severity and plasma IL-6 after hysterectomy.

METHOD

A prospective, randomized, comparative, double-blind study with 40 patients, aged 18-60 years. G1 received lidocaine (2mg.kg(-1).h(-1)) or G2 received 0.9% saline solution during the operation. Anesthesia was induced with O2/isoflurane. Pain severity (T0: awake and 6, 12, 18 and 24hours), first analgesic request, and dose of morphine in 24hours were evaluated. IL-6 was measured before starting surgery (T0), five hours after the start (T5), and 24hours after the end of surgery (T24).

RESULTS

There was no difference in pain severity between groups. There was a decrease in pain severity between T0 and other measurement times in G1. Time to first supplementation was greater in G2 (76.0±104.4min) than in G1 (26.7±23.3min). There was no difference in supplemental dose of morphine between G1 (23.5±12.6mg) and G2 (18.7±11.3mg). There were increased concentrations of IL-6 in both groups from T0 to T5 and T24. There was no difference in IL-6 dosage between groups. Lidocaine concentration was 856.5±364.1 ng.mL(-1) in T5 and 30.1±14.2 ng.mL(-1) in T24.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous lidocaine (2mg.kg(-1).h(-1)) did not reduce pain severity and plasma levels of IL-6 in patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy.

Lidocaine administration before tracheal extubation cannot reduce post-operative cognition disorders in elderly patients

Background:

Cognitive dysfunction after surgery is common in elderly patients. Many factors such as anesthetic drugs can cause complication in this surgery. Lidocaine is one of the drugs commonly used during anesthesia. So, we designed this study to find out cognitive effect of lidocaine in elderly patients undergoing non-cardiac surgeries.

Materials and Methods:

In this double-blinded clinical trial, we enrolled 70 patients older than 65 years age undergoing urologic or orthopedic surgeries, were divided in two groups. Patients randomly received intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg) or normal saline in the same volume immediately before extubation. Mini mental state examination (MMSE) test was used to evaluate cognitive state at discharge time, 6 and 24 h after surgery.

Results:

Mean MMSE scores at the time of discharge from recovery room in lidocaine and saline groups were 22.4 ± 4.5 vs. 22.1 ± 4.4, P = 0.755, respectively. It was significantly lower than MMSE before surgery, 6 and 24 h after the operation. The mean MMSE scores and frequency distribution of intensity of cognitive impairments were not significantly different between two groups at different times.

Conclusion:

Bolus intravenous lidocaine before extubation, did not affect cognitive states in elders undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Effect of lidocaine on cardiac surgeries is clear, but in non-cardiac surgeries, lidocaine has no clinical effects. So, more studies with different doses of lidocaine and different assessment methods are recommended.

Medical management of acute pain in patients with chronic pain

The number of patients with chronic pain has increased over the years, as well as the number of patients who manage chronic pain with opioids. As prescribed opioid use has increased, so has its abuse and misuse. It has also been estimated that the number of people using opioids illicitly has doubled worldwide over the last 20 years. Management of chronic pain with opioids is associated with pathophysiological phenomena such as tolerance, dependence and hyperalgesia. They can become a problem when chronic pain patients present for a surgical procedure. Furthermore, patients who are on opioids on a regular basis require higher amounts during the perioperative period. The perioperative management of the chronic pain patient is difficult and complex. Developing an appropriate plan that can fulfill patients' and surgical team's needs requires skills and experience. The aim of this review is to describe the options available for the optimal perioperative management of acute pain in patients with a history of chronic pain.

Intravenous lidocaine has no impact on rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block. Randomised study

BACKGROUND

Intravenous lidocaine is increasingly used in surgical patients. As it has neuromuscular blocking effects, we tested the impact of an intravenous lidocaine infusion on the time course of a rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block.

METHODS

Fifty-two adults undergoing surgery were randomly allocated to intravenous lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg followed by a continuous infusion of 2 mg/kg/h or physiological saline (control) throughout surgery. Anaesthesia was induced and maintained with a target-controlled propofol infusion and sufentanil. After loss of consciousness, rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg was given. Neuromuscular transmission was measured using train-of-four (TOF)-watch SX (Organon, Swords Co., Dublin, Ireland) acceleromyography.

RESULTS

Onset time (to 95% depression of first twitch) was on average 113.9 s (standard deviation 35.3) with lidocaine and 119.5 s (44.9) with saline (P = 0.618). Total recovery time (TOF ratio 0.9) was on average 58.1 min (15.1) with lidocaine and 54.3 min (16.9) with saline (P = 0.394). Clinical duration (until first twitch has recovered to 25%) was on average 33.3 min (7.2) with lidocaine and 30.6 min (8.1) with saline (P = 0.21). Recovery index (time between 25% and 75% recovery of the first twitch) was on average 11.5 min (5.0) with lidocaine and 10.6 min (4.1) with saline (P = 0.458). Recovery time (between 25% recovery of the first twitch and TOF ratio 0.9) was on average 24.8 min (9.3) with lidocaine and 23.2 min (9.2) with saline (P = 0.541).

CONCLUSION

A continuous intravenous infusion of lidocaine has no impact on the time course of the neuromuscular blockade induced by a standard intubation dose of rocuronium.