Factors associated with intravenous lidocaine in pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy - a retrospective, single-centre experience

Potential influence of different peri-operative analgesic regimens on tumour biology and outcome after oncologic surgery: A narrative review

The management of peri-operative pain is one of the pillars of anaesthesia and is of particular importance in patients undergoing surgery for solid malignant tumours. Amongst several options, the most commonly employed analgesic regimens involve opioids, NSAIDs and regional anaesthesia techniques with different local anaesthetics. In recent years, several research reports have tried to establish a connection between peri-operative anaesthesia care and outcome after cancer surgery. Experimental studies have indicated that certain pain management substances may influence cancer progression, mainly by modifying the tumour's response to surgical stress and peri-operative inflammation. However, these promising in-vitro and in-vivo data have yet to be confirmed by randomised clinical trials. The reason for this might lie with the nature of tumour biology itself, and in the diversity of patient and tumour phenotypes. In a translational approach, future research should therefore concentrate on patient and tumour-related factors or biomarkers, which might either influence the tumour and its microenvironment or predict potential responses to interventions, including the choice of the analgesic. This might not only be relevant for the daily practice of clinical anaesthesia, but would also be of great importance for patients undergoing cancer surgery, who might be able to receive an individualised anaesthetic regimen based on their phenotypic profile.

Intraoperative application of low-dose dexmedetomidine or lidocaine for postoperative analgesia in pediatric patients following craniotomy: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial

Background

Postoperative pain is a common occurrence in pediatric patients following craniotomy, often leading to negative outcomes. Intravenous dexmedetomidine and lidocaine are commonly used adjuvant medicines in general anesthesia to reduce perioperative opioid consumption and relieve postoperative pain in adults. While they show promise for use in pediatrics, the evidence of their application in pediatric craniotomy patients is limited. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine on postoperative pain in pediatric patients following craniotomy.

Methods

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, single-center trial on children scheduled for craniotomy. The 255 recruited participants aged 1-12 years were randomly assigned to intraoperatively receive a loading intravenous dose of either dexmedetomidine 1 μg·kg-1 or lidocaine 2 mg·kg-1 or normal saline for 15 min followed by dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg·kg-1·h-1 or lidocaine 1 mg·kg-1·h-1 or normal saline until the sutures of endocranium were completed. The primary outcome was the cumulative sufentanil consumption within 24 h post-surgery.

Results

A total of 241 patients were included in the statistical analysis. The primary outcome did not show any significant differences among the three groups (median (IQR) lidocaine group: 3.36 (1.32-5.64) μg vs. dexmedetomidine group: 3.12 (1.36-6.39) μg vs. control group 3.46 (1.77-7.62) μg, p = 0.485). Among the secondary outcomes, there was a statistically significant but small reduction in sufentanil consumption within 2 h, postoperative FLACC/WBFS/NRS pain scores within 4 h after surgery and postoperative Ramsay sedation scores in dexmedetomidine group (p < 0.05). Regarding postoperative complications, the incidence of electrolyte disturbance within 24 and 48 h after surgery was significantly higher in control group compared to the other two groups. There were no significant differences in intraoperative opioid consumption, postoperative frequency of remedy medication, or length of hospitalization among the three groups. No adverse events related to lidocaine or dexmedetomidine were observed.

Conclusions

There were no significant differences in the primary outcome among the three groups. Although dexmedetomidine showed some benefits in reducing postoperative opioid consumption within the first 2 h and pain intensity within the first 4 h post-surgery, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Further research is required to comprehensively assess the outcomes and determine the optimal administration strategy.

Clinical Trial Registration

[http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx], identifier [ChiCTR1800019411].

Perioperative Immunosuppressive Factors during Cancer Surgery: An Updated Review

Surgical excision of the primary tumor represents the most frequent and curative procedure for solid malignancies. Compelling evidence suggests that, despite its beneficial effects, surgery may impair immunosurveillance by triggering an immunosuppressive inflammatory stress response and favor recurrence by stimulating minimal residual disease. In addition, many factors interfere with the immune effectors before and after cancer procedures, such as malnutrition, anemia, or subsequent transfusion. Thus, the perioperative period plays a key role in determining oncological outcomes and represents a short phase to circumvent anesthetic and surgical deleterious factors by supporting the immune system through the use of synergistic pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. In line with this, accumulating studies indicate that anesthetic agents could drive both protumor or antitumor signaling pathways during or after cancer surgery. While preclinical investigations focusing on anesthetics' impact on the behavior of cancer cells are quite convincing, limited clinical trials studying the consequences on survival and recurrences remain inconclusive. Herein, we highlight the main factors occurring during the perioperative period of cancer surgery and their potential impact on immunomodulation and cancer progression. We also discuss patient management prior to and during surgery, taking into consideration the latest advances in the literature.

Effect of Intraoperative Intravenous Lidocaine on Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients with Hip Fracture: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

This study was performed to evaluate the effects of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine on postoperative delirium in elderly patients with hip fracture.

Patients and methods

In total, 100 elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery were randomized to the lidocaine group (Group L) or saline (control) group (Group C). Before anesthetic induction, Group L received lidocaine at 1 mg/kg for more than 10 minutes followed by continuous infusion at 1.5 mg/kg/h until the end of surgery. Group C received normal saline, and the injection methods were consistent with those in Group L. General anesthesia was induced with propofol, sufentanil, and cis-atracurium. Anesthesia was maintained by propofol and remifentanil. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative delirium in the first 7 postoperative days. The secondary outcomes included the severity of delirium, onset and duration of delirium, emergence agitation, adverse events, total propofol dose, intraoperative opioid dosage, length of post-anesthesia care unit stay, extubation time, and patient satisfaction with postoperative pain management.

Results

All 100 patients completed the study. The incidence of postoperative delirium was lower in Group L than in Group C (14% vs 36%, P = 0.011). The delirium severity scores were lower in Group L (3 [3-4]) than in Group C (4 [4-5]) (P = 0.017). In addition, the incidences of hypertension, tachycardia, and emergence agitation were significantly lower in Group L than in Group C. No cases of local anesthetic toxicity occurred in either group.

Conclusion

Patients received lidocaine at 1 mg/kg for more than 10 minutes followed by continuous infusion at 1.5 mg/kg/h until the end of surgery, which can reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing hip fracture. In addition, the used regimen of lidocaine would not increase the risk of local anesthetic toxicity.

Pain Management Throughout Pediatric Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Systematic Review

Opioid-related fatalities are a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Appendicitis is a common cause of abdominal pain in children and adolescents. The management of pain throughout the laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in the pediatric population is a critical concern. This study aimed to evaluate trends in analgesic use and patient satisfaction following LA, with a focus on reducing the reliance on opioids for pain management. From 2003 to 2023, 18258 articles were filtered for all types of analgesic use with LA. The publications were screened using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and 19 studies were included for analysis and review. The study included peer-reviewed experimental and observational studies involving individuals under 18 years. Pain management strategies varied across studies, involving a combination of analgesics, nerve blocks, and wound infiltrations. Analgesics such as acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and opioids were administered before and after surgery. Some studies implemented patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pumps. Other studies explored non-pharmacological interventions like magnetic acupuncture. The results showed a reduction in the need for postoperative analgesics in patients treated with LA, particularly when using non-opioid medications and novel analgesic techniques. Pediatric patients who received gabapentin reported lower opioid use, shorter hospital stays, and high satisfaction rates. However, the reliance on opioids remained significant in some cases, particularly among patients with peritonitis who required more morphine. Pain management in pediatric patients is multifaceted, involving preoperative and postoperative analgesics, nerve blocks, and PCA pumps. Efforts to improve pain management following pediatric LA while reducing opioid reliance are essential in the context of the ongoing opioid epidemic. The findings from this study highlight the potential benefits of non-opioid analgesics, nerve blocks, and alternative methods for managing postoperative pain in <18 appendectomy patients. Further research and standardization of pain management protocols are needed to ensure optimal patient outcomes and minimize the risk of opioid-related complications.

The Effect of Preoperative Combined with Intravenous Lidocaine and Ketamine vs. Intravenous Ketamine on Pediatric Patients Undergoing Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Background

Ketamine is widely used in pediatric sedation. New studies have recommended combination therapy to reduce the side effects of ketamine.

Objectives

This study investigated the effect of adding intravenous (IV) lidocaine to ketamine on hemodynamic parameters, endoscopist satisfaction, and recovery time of children undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Methods

This triple-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted in Isfahan, Iran (2021). One hundred twenty children between the ages of 1 and 6 were enrolled. Patients were divided into 2 groups. The intervention group received 1.0 mg/kg of IV lidocaine and 1.0 mg/kg of IV ketamine, and the placebo group received 1.0 mg/kg of IV ketamine and placebo 2 minutes before entering the endoscopic room. Patients in both groups were sedated with 1.0 mg/kg of propofol, 0.1 mg/kg of midazolam, and 2.0 ug/kg of fentanyl for the procedure. The pulse rate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation were recorded 1 minute before injection and every 5 minutes afterward.

Results

The mean (SD) ages of the intervention and control groups were 3.4 (1.5) and 3.4 (1.7), respectively. The mean difference in hemodynamic parameters between the 2 groups was insignificant during the investigation (P > 0.05). Furthermore, no significant differences were found regarding endoscopist satisfaction scores and length of recovery room stay (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Adding low-dose IV lidocaine to ketamine for pediatric sedation does not significantly affect the hemodynamic status, endoscopist satisfaction, and recovery time.

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine use in children

Perioperative pain management impacts patient morbidity, quality of life, and hospitalization cost. In children, it impacts not only the child, but the whole family. Adjuncts for improved perioperative analgesia continue to be sought to minimize adverse side effects associated with opioids and for those in whom regional or neuraxial anesthesia is not suitable. The use of ketamine and alpha agonists may be useful in these settings but have noted adverse effects including hallucinations, hemodynamic instability, and excessive sedation. One alternative is intravenous lidocaine. Despite its off-label use, intravenous lidocaine has demonstrated anti-neuropathic, anti-hyperalgesic, and anti-inflammatory actions and is an emerging technique. Multiple studies in adults have demonstrated beneficial effects of perioperative intravenous lidocaine including improved perioperative analgesia with reduced postoperative opioid use, improved gastrointestinal function, earlier mobilization, and reduction in hospital length of stay. Despite the limited pediatric literature, some of these findings have been replicated. Large-scale trials providing evidence for the pediatric pharmacokinetics and high-quality safety data with respect to intravenous lidocaine are still however lacking. To date, dose ranges studied in the pediatric population have not been associated with serious side effects and current data suggests perioperative intravenous lidocaine in a subgroup of pediatric surgical patients seems well-tolerated and beneficial.

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

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

Total Intravenous Anesthesia with Ketofol versus Combination of Ketofol and Lidocaine for Short-Term Anesthesia in Pediatric Patients; Double Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial of Effects on Recovery

Background: Ketofol admixture has been proposed to be useful for sedation and general anesthesia. The beneficial effect of the combination of ketofol with lidocaine may be a shortened time of anesthesia and recovery period. This study aimed to establish the effect of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with ketofol and ketofol with lidocaine on recovery in children. Methods: Two hundred children from the ages of 1–12 years who underwent short surgical procedures were randomly allocated into two groups. Propofol mixtures (ketofol) were prepared for group l. A ratio of 1:4 of ketofol was used for induction and for the maintenance of anesthesia a ratio of was used 1:7. For the induction and maintenance of anesthesia ketofol with lidocaine (lidoketofol) was used in group II. The McFarlan infusion regimen was used with reduction. The extubating time, anesthesia duration and the length of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) were recorded. Results: Extubation time showed to be considerably shorter in the lidoketofol group than in the ketofol group (120 s versus 240 s; p < 0.00001). The anesthesia duration was also significantly shorter in the lidoketofol group (35 min vs. 50 min; p < 0.00001). The lidoketofol group showed to have a lower length of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) than the ketofol group (20 min vs. 35 min; p < 0.00001). The lidoketofol group showed lower fentanyl consumption per kg (2.1 µg per kg vs. 2.3 µg per kg; p < 0.056) and lower propofol consumption (6.6 mg per kg vs. 7.6 mg per kg; p < 0.032). Conclusion: The recovery in pediatric anesthesia can improve with usage of TIVA with ketofol plus lidocaine admixture with a reduced McFarlan dose regimen.

Quality metrics for emergency abdominal surgery in children: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is variation in care quality and outcomes for children undergoing emergency abdominal surgery, such as appedectomy. Addressing this requires paediatric-specific quality metrics. The aim of this study was to identify perioperative structure and process measures that are associated with improved outcomes for these children.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for articles published between January 1, 1980 and September 29, 2020 about the perioperative care of children undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. We also conducted secondary searching of references and citations, and we included international professional publications.

RESULTS

We identified and analysed 383 peer-reviewed articles and 18 grey literature publications. High-grade evidence pertaining to the perioperative care of this patient group is limited. Most of the evidence available relates to improving diagnostic accuracy using preoperative blood testing, imaging, and clinical decision tools. Processes associated with clinical outcomes include time lapse between time of presentation or initial assessment and surgery, and the use of particular analgesia and antibiotic protocols. Structural factors identified include hospital and surgeon caseload and the use of perioperative care pathways.

CONCLUSIONS

This review summarises the structural and process measures associated with outcome in paediatric emergency abdominal surgery. Such measures provide a means of evaluating care and identifying areas of practice that require quality improvement, especially in children with appendicitis.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017055285.

Use of intravenous lidocaine for dose reduction of propofol in paediatric colonoscopy patients: a randomised placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Propofol, a widely used sedative in endoscopic procedures, sometimes causes cardiopulmonary complications. Intravenous lidocaine can diminish visceral pain and decrease the dose of propofol. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine in reducing propofol dosage during paediatric colonoscopy.

METHODS

Forty children who underwent colonoscopy were divided into two groups. Lidocaine hydrochloride (1.5 mg/kg induction and 2 mg/kg/h maintenance) was given intravenously to the lidocaine group, and the same amount of saline was given to the control group after they received lidocaine induction. Propofol initial plasma concentration of 5 μg/mL was targeted, and the procedure was performed after the bispectral index value reached 55. The primary outcome was propofol requirement.

RESULTS

The propofol requirement in the lidocaine group was decreased by 35.5% (128.6 ± 30.4 mg vs. 199.4 ± 57.6 mg; p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 100.60, - 41.02). The incidence of involuntary body movements was significantly lower in the lidocaine group (p = 0.028; OR = 0.17; 95%CI: 0.03, 0.92). The awakening time (p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 7.67, - 5.13) and recovery times (p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 7.45, - 4.35) were significantly lower in the lidocaine group. Pain was significantly less at 30 min and 60 min after the procedure in the lidocaine group (0 [0-4] vs. 3 [0-5], p < 0. 001; 0 [0-2] vs. 1 [0-3], p = 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of bradycardia, hypotension, or hypoxia between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

For colonoscopy procedures in paediatric patients, intravenous lidocaine reduces the amount of propofol needed, provides better sedation and postprocedural pain management, as well as a reduction in recovery time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered on November 6, 2020 at China Clinical Trials Registration Center ( www.chictr.org.cn ) ref.: ChiCTR 2,000,039,706.

Continuous infusion of lidocaine in pediatric colonoscopy: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Propofol is commonly used for providing procedural sedation during pediatric colonoscopy. Intravenous (i.v.) lidocaine can mitigate visceral pain and reduce propofol requirements during surgery. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of i.v. lidocaine on perioperative propofol and sufentanil dose, pulse oxygen saturation, postoperative pain score, and recovery time during pediatric colonoscopy.

METHODS

We designed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study and enrolled 40 children aged from 3 to 10 years who underwent colonoscopy. After titration of propofol to achieve unconsciousness, the patients were given i.v. lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg later 2 mg/kg^/hour) or the same volume of saline. Sedation was standardized and combined propofol with sufentanil. The primary outcome variables were intraoperative propofol and sufentanil requirements, and the number of oxygen desaturation episodes. Secondary outcome variables were recovery time after colonoscopy and post-colonoscopy pain.

RESULTS

Lidocaine infusion resulted in a significant reduction in propofol requirements: (median (quartile) 1.8 (1.5-2.0) vs. 3.0 (2.8-3.3) mg/kg respectively; P < 0.001) and sufentanil requirements: (median (quartile) 0.06 (0.05-0.08) vs. 0.1 (0.1-0.1) μg/kg respectively; P < 0.001). The number of subjects who experienced oxygen desaturation below 95% in the lidocaine group was also significantly less than that in the control group: 1 vs. 6 (P = 0.04). The mean (SD) recovery time was significantly shorter in the lidocaine group: (19.2 (2.6) vs. 13.3 (2.6) min respectively; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in post-colonoscopy pain.

CONCLUSION

Continuous infusion of lidocaine resulted in reduction of propofol and sufentanil requirements, recovery time, and risk of hypoxemia during pediatric colonoscopy.

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

Abstract

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

Objectives

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

Design

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

Participants

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

Intervention

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

Primary outcome measure

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

Secondary outcome measures

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

Results

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusions

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

Trial registration

NCT03886896.

Systemic Lidocaine Infusion for Post-Operative Analgesia in Children Undergoing Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial

Systemic lidocaine can provide satisfactory post-operative analgesia in adults. In this study, we assessed whether intravenous lidocaine is effective for post-operative analgesia and recovery in children undergoing laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. A total of 66 children aged from six months to less than six years were classified in either the lidocaine (L) or control (C) groups. Children in Group L received a lidocaine infusion (a bolus dose of 1 mL kg⁻¹, followed by a 1.5 mg kg⁻¹ h⁻¹ infusion), whereas Group C received the same volume of 0.9% saline. The primary outcome was the number of patients who presented face, legs, activity, crying and consolability (FLACC) scores of four or more, and therefore received rescue analgesia in the post-anesthesia recovery care unit (PACU). Secondary outcomes included the highest FLACC score in the PACU, FLACC, and the parents’ postoperative pain measure (PPPM) score at 48 h post-operation, as well as side effects. The number of children who received rescue analgesia in the PACU was 15 (50%) in Group L and 22 (73%) in Group C (p = 0.063). However, the highest FLACC score in PACU was lower in Group L (3.8 ± 2.4) than in Group C (5.3 ± 2.7) (p = 0.029). In conclusion, systemic lidocaine did not reduce the number of children who received rescue analgesia in PACU.