Systemic lidocaine shortens length of hospital stay after colorectal surgery: a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

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.

Peripherally Acting μ-Opioid Receptor Antagonists in the Management of Postoperative Ileus: a Clinical Review

Postoperative ileus (POI) and constipation are common secondary effects of opioids and carry significant clinical and economic impacts. μ-Opioid receptors mediate opioid analgesia in the central nervous system (CNS) and gastrointestinal-related effects in the periphery. Peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) block the peripheral effects of opioids in the gastrointestinal tract, while maintaining opioid analgesia in the CNS. While most are not approved for POI or postoperative opioid-induced constipation (OIC), PAMORAs have a potential role in these settings via their selective effects on the μ-opioid receptor. This review will discuss recent clinical trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of PAMORAs, with a focus on alvimopan (Entereg^®) and methylnaltrexone (Relistor^®) in patients with POI or postoperative OIC. We will characterize potential factors that may have impacted the efficacy observed in phase 3 trials and discuss future directions for the management and treatment of POI.

Anaesthetic considerations in polytrauma patients

Trauma remains a major public health concern due to the high cost, associated morbidity, and mortality both in developed and developing countries. Management of polytrauma patients has advanced and improved over the last few decades with a better understanding of the pathophysiology of shock, resuscitation, and hemodynamic changes. Anaesthesia and application of anaesthetic principles have consequently evolved and can be applied in polytrauma patients throughout their journey of treatment beginning from pre-hospital care, emergency department resuscitation, surgical procedures, and rehabilitation. Providing immediate pain relief is an important component in the management of these patients. Performing peripheral nerve blocks in the pre-hospital setting when feasible or on arrival in the emergency room provides rapid pain relief, better patient co-operation, decreases the risk of chronic pain syndromes. This narrative evaluates the role of anaesthesia and anaesthesiologists in the management of polytrauma patients. The authors performed a thorough review of the literature using various databased of Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. The relevant papers were also searched manually from the cross-referencing of retrieved papers. Full papers published in English till September 25, 2020 were included for this review. The keywords included 'trauma', 'difficult airway', 'anaesthesia', 'fluid and blood', 'monitoring', 'critical care', 'resuscitation' and 'surgery' in various combinations. The holistic management of trauma victims requires a multidisciplinary time-based approach for an optimal outcome. The management starts from assessment and simultaneous management for the optimization of the trauma victim from the first point of contact itself. The anaesthetic technique of choice in the perioperative management of trauma patients depends on different factors such as neurological status, cardiovascular stability, type and duration of surgery, coagulation status. Regional techniques are to be used whenever possible due to the beneficial effects observed with these techniques. Various important aspects are being discussed in subsequent sections.

Effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine for patients undergoing spine surgery: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine has been reported to have analgesic and opioid-sparing effects in many kinds of surgery. Several studies have evaluated its use in the settings of spine surgery. The aim of the study is to examine the effect of intravenous lidocaine in patients undergoing spine surgery.

METHODS

We performed a quantitative systematic review. Databases of PubMed, Medline, Embase database and Cochrane library were investigated for eligible literatures from their establishments to June, 2019. Articles of randomized controlled trials that compared intravenous lidocaine to a control group in patients undergoing spine surgery were included. The primary outcome was postoperative pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid consumption and the length of hospital stay.

RESULT

Four randomized controlled trials with 275 patients were included in the study. postoperative pain compared with control was reduced at 6 hours after surgery (WMD -0.50, 95%CI, -0.76 to -0.25, P < .001), at 24 hours after surgery (WMD -0.50, 95%CI, -0.70 to -0.29, P < .001) and at 48 hours after surgery (WMD -0.57, 95%CI, -0.96 to -0.17, P = .005). The effect of intravenous lidocaine on postoperative opioid consumption compared with control revealed a significant effect (WMD -15.36, 95%CI, -21.40 to -9.33 mg intravenous morphine equivalents, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This quantitative analysis of randomized controlled trials demonstrated that the perioperative intravenous lidocaine was effective for reducing postoperative opioid consumption and pain in patients undergoing spine surgery. The intravenous lidocaine should be considered as an effective adjunct to improve analgesic outcomes in patients undergoing spine surgery. However, the quantity of the studies was very low, more research is needed.

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on ischemia-reperfusion injury in DIEP microsurgical breast reconstruction. A prospective double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Ischemia-reperfusion injury in free flaps is associated with tissue damage and is one of the main factors causing flap failure in reconstructive microsurgery. The aim of this study is to assess whether any ischemia-reperfusion injury takes place during a microsurgical flap reconstruction as seen through the levels of malondialdehyde (MDA) and superoxide dismutase, biomarkers of oxidative stress, and to analyze the effect of lidocaine in this process.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients operated for immediate breast reconstruction using the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator free flap technique were divided into two groups: one group was treated with a lidocaine intravenous perfusion and the other group with a saline perfusion. MDA and superoxide dismutase (SOD) levels were measured at several points before, during, and after surgery.

RESULTS

There was an increase in MDA levels in both groups, but the lidocaine group experienced a decrease during reperfusion. On the other hand, we observed a rise in SOD levels in both groups, but a decrease during reperfusion in the placebo group. However, these differences between groups were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The decreased SOD activity and increased MDA content in our research prove a redox imbalance and high reactive oxygen species levels in flaps, indicating that tissues experience ischemia-reperfusion injury during microsurgical reconstruction. Lidocaine may have a protective effect in free flap surgery, but our results were not statistically significant, so further studies will be required.

The use of intravenous lidocaine for postoperative pain and recovery: international consensus statement on efficacy and safety

Intravenous lidocaine is used widely for its effect on postoperative pain and recovery but it can be, and has been, fatal when used inappropriately and incorrectly. The risk-benefit ratio of i.v. lidocaine varies with type of surgery and with patient factors such as comorbidity (including pre-existing chronic pain). This consensus statement aims to address three questions. First, does i.v. lidocaine effectively reduce postoperative pain and facilitate recovery? Second, is i.v. lidocaine safe? Third, does the fact that i.v. lidocaine is not licensed for this indication affect its use? We suggest that i.v. lidocaine should be regarded as a 'high-risk' medicine. Individual anaesthetists may feel that, in selected patients, i.v. lidocaine may be beneficial as part of a multimodal peri-operative pain management strategy. This approach should be approved by hospital medication governance systems, and the individual clinical decision should be made with properly informed consent from the patient concerned. If i.v. lidocaine is used, we recommend an initial dose of no more than 1.5 mg.kg^-1 , calculated using the patient's ideal body weight and given as an infusion over 10 min. Thereafter, an infusion of no more than 1.5 mg.kg^-1 .h^-1 for no longer than 24 h is recommended, subject to review and re-assessment. Intravenous lidocaine should not be used at the same time as, or within the period of action of, other local anaesthetic interventions. This includes not starting i.v. lidocaine within 4 h after any nerve block, and not performing any nerve block until 4 h after discontinuing an i.v. lidocaine infusion.

Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion for the Management of Early Postoperative Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Controlled Trials

Previously used as anti-arrhythmic, intravenous lidocaine infusion is becoming popular for use in management of acute pain. There is still much to be understood about its pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, especially with regard to optimal dosing to avoid side effects. In this article, we selected and reviewed randomized controlled trials to summarize the pharmacokinetics, antinociceptive effects, anti-hyperalgesic effects, anti-inflammatory effects, side effects, and role of intravenous lidocaine in the management of early postoperative pain. The mechanisms of action of lidocaine are still unclear but there are many theories postulated. Optimal dosing of lidocaine is not known but general consensus indicates that a loading dose of 1-2 mg/kg, followed by 1-2 mg/kg/hr continuous infusion during early postoperative pain control while recovering from anesthesia to achieve therapeutic levels of 0.5-5 mcg/kg clearly improves analgesia in the immediate postoperative period. Although lidocaine was initially studied and proven to have clear analgesic effects following laparoscopic and open abdominal surgeries, it has now been shown to be applicable in different clinical settings perioperatively including following spinal, breast, ENT and other surgeries. It is generally safe, with hypotension, headache and vomiting being the more common side effects. Serious adverse effects include cardiovascular block and arrhythmias, neuro-excitability and hypersensitivity, although the frequency of these are not known.

A Standardized Multimodal Analgesia Protocol Reduces Perioperative Opioid Use in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Multimodal analgesia protocols are becoming a common part of enhanced recovery pathways after colorectal surgery. However, few protocols include a robust intraoperative component in addition to pre-operative and post-operative analgesics.

METHOD

A prospective cohort study was performed in an urban teaching hospital in patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery before and after implementation of a multimodal analgesia protocol consisting of pre-operative (gabapentin, acetaminophen, celecoxib), intraoperative (lidocaine and magnesium infusions, ketorolac, transversus abdominis plane block), and post-operative (gabapentin, acetaminophen, celecoxib) opioid-sparing elements. The main outcome measure was use of morphine equivalents in the first 24-h post-operative period.

RESULTS

The study cohort (n = 71) included 41 patients before and 30 patients after implementation of a multimodal analgesia protocol. Mean age of the entire study cohort was 47 ± 19.7 years and 46% were male. Patients undergoing surgery post-multimodal analgesia vs. pre-multimodal analgesia had significantly lower use of IV morphine equivalents in first 24-h post-operative period (5.8 ± 6.4 mg vs. 22.8 ± 21.3 mg; p = 0.005) and first 48-h post-operative period (7.6 ± 9.4 mg vs. 42 ± 52.9 mg; p = 0.0008). This reduction in IV morphine equivalent use post-multimodal analgesia was coupled with improved pain scores in the post-operative period. Post-operative hospital length of stay, post-operative ileus, and overall complications were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Multimodal analgesia incorporating pre-operative, intraoperative, and post-operative opioid-sparing agents is an effective method for reducing perioperative opioid utilization and pain after minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

Pharmacokinetics of lidocaine after bilateral ESP block

INTRODUCTION

Erector spinae plane (ESP) block is an emerging interfascial block with a wide range of indications for perioperative analgesia and chronic pain treatment. Recent studies have focused their attention on mechanisms of action of ESP block. However, the pharmacokinetics of drugs injected in ESP is, as of now, uninvestigated. The aim of this brief report is to investigate the pharmacokinetics of lidocaine in a series of 10 patients.

METHODS

We are reporting a case series of 10 patients undergoing bilateral ESP block for multilevel lumbar spine surgery.ESP was performed with 3.5 mg/kg of lidocaine based on ideal body weight. Lidocaine concentration was dosed at 5, 15, 30 min and at 1, 2 and 3 hours.

RESULTS

T_max was 5 min for all the patients. C_max ranged from 1.2 to 3.8 mg/L (mean: 2.59 mg/L). AUC_0-3 was high (76%, on average) suggesting an almost complete bioavailability. Age had a negative correlation with T½ of lidocaine.

CONCLUSIONS

Lidocaine pharmacokinetic after ESP block is well-described by a two-compartment model with a rapid and extensive rate of absorption. Nevertheless, its peak concentrations never exceeded the accepted toxicity limit. Elimination half-life was slightly prolonged, probably due to the advanced age of some patients.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2000028937.

The impact of peri-operative intravenous lidocaine on postoperative outcome after elective colorectal surgery: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There has recently been increasing interest in the use of peri-operative intravenous lidocaine (IVL) due to its analgesic, anti-inflammatory and opioid-sparing effects. However, these potential benefits are not well established in elective colorectal surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of peri-operative IVL infusion on postoperative outcome in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing peri-operative IVL with placebo infusion in elective colorectal surgery. The primary outcome measure was postoperative pain scores up to 48 h. The secondary outcome measures included time to return of gastrointestinal function, postoperative morphine requirement, anastomotic leak, local anaesthetic toxicity and hospital length of stay.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases were searched on 5 November 2018.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies were included if they were RCTs evaluating the role of peri-operative IVL vs. placebo in adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Exclusion criteria were paediatric patients, noncolorectal or emergency procedures, non-RCT methodology or lack of relevant outcome measures.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were included (n = 508 patients; 265 who had undergone IVL infusion, 243 who had undergone placebo infusion). IVL infusion was associated with a significant reduction in time to defecation (mean difference -12.06 h, 95% CI -17.83 to -6.29, I = 93%, P = 0.0001), hospital length of stay (mean difference -0.76 days, 95% CI -1.32 to -0.19, I = 45%, P = 0.009) and postoperative pain scores at early time points, although this difference does not meet the threshold for a clinically relevant difference. There was no difference in time to pass flatus (mean difference -5.33 h, 95% CI -11.53 to 0.88, I = 90%, P = 0.09), nor in rates of surgical site infection or anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides some support for the administration of peri-operative IVL infusion in elective colorectal surgery. However, further evidence is necessary to fully elucidate its potential benefits in light of the high levels of study heterogeneity and mixed quality of methodology.

Intravenous Lidocaine for Acute Pain: A Single-Institution Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

In the perioperative period, intravenous lidocaine has been used as an opioid-sparing systemic analgesic with additional anti-inflammatory and anti-hyperalgesic properties.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this retrospective study was to review the utilization, efficacy, and safety of intravenous lidocaine on our Acute Pain Service (APS) and identify surgical and patient populations where this intervention was found to be useful.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study was designed to assess acute pain management in patients who received an intravenous lidocaine infusion between February 2013 and December 2017. Data collected included demographics, surgery type, infusion duration, pain scores, analgesic consumption, and adverse effects. Pain scores included rest and active pain scores and were analyzed by surgical model and subgroups. Clinically important differences (CIDs) in pain were determined by changes in pain score difference of ≥ 2 (11-point scale) or ≥ 30% reduction in pain intensity. A patient was considered to have a true CID if a CID was observed with rest and/or active pain scores at both first to second (4-24 h) and first to final time point (4 h to infusion end) comparisons.

RESULTS

In total, 544 patients received intravenous lidocaine during this period, and 394 were included in the final analysis. The average (± standard deviation) duration of infusion was 68.60 ± 49.52 h. Surgical specialties included gastrointestinal surgery (41%), orthopedics (28%), neurosurgery (15%), vascular surgery (10%), and others (6%). Overall, 56.1% of the study population experienced a CID, with reduced pain scores at rest and/or with activity. CIDs were also observed in patients with chronic pain (53.5%) and when intravenous lidocaine was used as a rescue technique (69.6%). Within the rescue cohort, opioid-dependent and opioid-naïve patients experienced 23.0% and 45.6% reductions, respectively, in their 8-h intravenous opioid consumption. In total, 37 patients in the study experienced transient signs of mild local anesthetic toxicity, which resolved with infusion titration (conservative) management. One serious adverse event required intervention, and the patient was successfully resuscitated.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study at a single institution with an APS policy for intravenous lidocaine in the postoperative period identifies benefits of intravenous lidocaine in certain surgical and patient populations. The findings need to be confirmed with further research.

Intravenous, Perioperatively Administered Lidocaine Regulates Serum Pain Modulators’ Concentrations in Children Undergoing Spinal Surgery

Objectives

We analyzed the influence of perioperative, intravenous (i.v.) lidocaine infusion as a part of multimodal anesthesia on concentrations of selected pain modulators.

Design

An observational study.

Setting

University Children’s Hospital in Cracow, Poland, from May 2015 to May 2018.

Subjects

Forty-four children undergoing extensive spinal surgery, divided into two groups after surgery: the study group (N = 23), anesthetized generally with lidocaine as a co-analgesic, and the control group (N = 22), anesthetized generally without lidocaine.

Methods

We assessed proinflammatory mediators like neuron growth factor (NGF), high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), interleukin 6 (IL-6), and FOS protein before, immediately after, six hours and 12–15 hours after surgery. We evaluated pain intensity at corresponding time points using a 10-point numerical/graphical scale.

Results

We observed that children in the lidocaine group had reduced pain intensity in the resting state and during movement until six hours after surgery when compared with controls. We found lower NGF concentrations in the lidocaine group vs controls only at six hours after surgery. Mean HMGB1 concentrations during the postoperative period in the study group were relatively stable, whereas we observed significant increases at six hours after surgery and a slight decrease at 12–15 hours after surgery in the control group. IL-6 concentrations at six hours were lower in lidocaine patients when compared with controls. We noted a negative correlation between HMGB1, NGF, Il-6, and lidocaine concentrations after surgery. We did not find any differences in FOS protein concentrations between the groups.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that intraoperative and postoperative i.v. lidocaine administration as a part of multimodal anesthesia may reduce inflammatory-dependent postoperative pain intensity.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

The propofol-sparing effect of intravenous lidocaine in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled study

Background

Propofol provides a prominent sedation effect in colonoscopy. However, anesthesia and sedation induced with propofol in the elderly might result in cardiopulmonary complications, especially when it is combined with opoids in the regimen. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that the addition of intravenous lidocaine to propofol-based sedation could decrease the overall propofol requirement in elderly patients during colonoscopy while the procedural sedation satisfaction and the hemodynamic stability were not compromised.

Methods

Ninety-two patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomly enrolled into lidocaine+propofol (L + P) group or normal saline+propofol (NS + P) groups. Subjects received intravenous bolus of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine followed by 4 mg kg^− 1 h^− 1 lidocaine continuous infusion in L + P group or equivalent volumes of normal saline for boluses and infusion in NS + P group. Anesthesia was induced with 2.5 μg sufentanil followed by injection of 1.2 mg kg^− 1 propofol in all patients. A single supplemental bolus of 0.6 mg kg^− 1 propofol was administered whenever MOAA/S score > 1 or had body movement during the colonoscopy. The recorded primary endpoints included: the total amount of propofol administered during entire procedure, the supplemental amount of propofol after induction, and the frequencies of boluses of supplemental propofol.

Results

A total of 79 patients were included in the final analysis. Compared with NS + P group, the total amounts of propofol (induction plus supplemental) were no significant differences in L + P group; however, the required supplemental propofol was less (69.9 ± 39.2 mg vs. 51.5 ± 38.6 mg) (P = 0.039); the average frequencies of boluses of supplemental propofol given after induction were lower (2.1 ± 1.1 vs. 1.4 ± 0.9) (P = 0.003); the calculated “unit propofol” infusion rate was lower (0.18 ± 0.05 vs. 0.14 ± 0.04 mg kg^− 1 min^− 1) (P = 0.002).

Conclusions

The addition of intravenous lidocaine to propofol-based sedation resulted in a remarked reduction of supplemental propofol in the elderly during colonoscopy.

Trial registration

The present clinical trial was registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn on 11th March 2019 (registration No. ChiCTR1900021818).

The efficacy of intravenous lidocaine and its side effects in comparison with intravenous morphine sulfate in patients admitted to the ED with right upper abdominal pain suspected of biliary colic

BACKGROUND

Intravenous (IV) Lidocaine can be used as analgesic in acute pain management in the emergency department (ED).

OBJECTIVE

Efficacy of IV Lidocaine in comparison with IV morphine in acute pain management in the ED.

METHOD

This is a double-blind randomized clinical trial on adult (18-64 year) patients with right upper abdominal pain suspected of biliary colic who needed pain management. Participants randomly received IV lidocaine (5 cc = 100 mg) or morphine sulfate (5 cc = 5 mg). In both groups, patients' pain scores were recorded and assessed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline, 10, 20, 30, 45, 60 and 120 min after drug administration. Adverse side effects of lidocaine and morphine sulfate and changes in vital signs were also recorded and compared.

RESULTS

A total number of 104 patients were enrolled in the study, including 49 men and 55 women. IV lidocaine reduced pain in less time in comparison with morphine sulfate. Mean (±SD) basic pain score was 8.23 (±1.76) in the lidocaine group and 8.73 (±0.96) in the morphine group. Patients' mean (±SD) pain score in both groups had no significant difference during the study except that of NRS2 (10 min after drug administration), which was 5.05 (±2.69) in lidocaine group compared with 6.39 (±2.06) in the morphine group and NRS4 (30 min after drug administration), which was significantly lower (P-value = 0.01) in the morphine group [3.84(±1.73) vs 4.41(±2.82)]. Only 9 patients had adverse effects in either group.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that IV lidocaine can be a good choice in pain management in biliary colic and can reduce pain in less time than morphine sulfate (in 10 min) without adding significant side effects; however, our primary outcome was the comparison of these two drugs after 60 min of drug administration in pain reduction which showed no significant difference between two groups.

Perioperative Heart-Brain Axis Protection in Obese Surgical Patients: The Nutrigenomic Approach

The number of obese patients undergoing cardiac and noncardiac surgery is rapidly increasing because they are more prone to concomitant diseases, such as diabetes, thrombosis, sleep-disordered breathing, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disorders. Even if guidelines are already available to manage anesthesia and surgery of obese patients, the assessment of the perioperative morbidity and mortality from heart and brain disorders in morbidly obese surgical patients will be challenging in the next years. The present review will recapitulate the new mechanisms underlying the Heart-brain Axis (HBA) vulnerability during the perioperative period in healthy and morbidly obese patients. Finally, we will describe the nutrigenomics approach, an emerging noninvasive dietary tool, to maintain a healthy body weight and to minimize the HBA propensity to injury in obese individuals undergoing all types of surgery by personalized intake of plant compounds that may regulate the switch from health to disease in an epigenetic manner. Our review provides current insights into the mechanisms underlying HBA response in obese surgical patients and how they are modulated by epigenetically active food constituents.

Impact of perioperative pain management on cancer recurrence: an ASRA/ESRA special article

Cancer causes considerable suffering and 80% of advanced cancer patients experience moderate to severe pain. Surgical tumor excision remains a cornerstone of primary cancer treatment, but is also recognized as one of the greatest risk factors for metastatic spread. The perioperative period, characterized by the surgical stress response, pharmacologic-induced angiogenesis, and immunomodulation results in a physiologic environment that supports tumor spread and distant reimplantation.In the perioperative period, anesthesiologists may have a brief and uniquewindow of opportunity to modulate the unwanted consequences of the stressresponse on the immune system and minimize residual disease. This reviewdiscusses the current research on analgesic therapies and their impact ondisease progression, followed by an evidence-based evaluation of perioperativepain interventions and medications.

The effects of intravenous lidocaine on wound pain and gastrointestinal function recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery

To evaluate the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine in relieving postoperative pain and promoting rehabilitation in laparoscopic colorectal surgery, we conducted this meta-analysis. The systematic search strategy was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese databases, and Cochrane Library before September 2019. As a result, 10 randomised clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis (n = 527 patients). Intravenous lidocaine significantly reduced pain scores at 2, 4, 12, 24, and 48 hours on movement and 2, 4, and 12 hours on resting-state and reduced opioid requirement in first 24 hours postoperatively (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -5.02 [-9.34, -0.70]; P = .02). It also decreased the first flatus time (WMD: -10.15 [-11.20, -9.10]; P < .00001), first defecation time (WMD: -10.27 [-17.62, -2.92]; P = .006), length of hospital stay (WMD: -1.05 [-1.89, -0.21]; P = .01), and reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (risk ratio: 0.53 [0.30, 0.93]; P = .03) when compared with control group. However, it had no effect on pain scores at 24 and 48 hours at rest, the normal dietary time, and the level of serum C-reactive protein. In summary, perioperative intravenous lidocaine could alleviate acute pain, reduce postoperative analgesic requirements, and accelerate recovery of gastrointestinal function in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Analgesic efficacy of 10% lidocaine spray during nasoenteral catheterization: Randomized triple-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common experience during nasoenteral catheterization. Although the procedure causes discomfort and distress to patients, procedural pain remains neglected and undertreated.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of the use of 10% lidocaine spray during nasoenteral catheterization.

METHOD

A randomized, triple-blind trial of 50 patients was performed. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups: an intervention group (IG), in which 10% lidocaine spray combined with 2% lidocaine gel was used, and a control group (CG), in which a saline solution spray combined with 2% lidocaine gel was used. Pain and discomfort were assessed during and after nasoenteral catheterization using numerical rating scale (NRS) and the visual analogue scale (VAS), respectively.

RESULTS

Intervention group participants reported lower pain scores during (0.20 ± 0.71 vs. 5.00 ± 2.84, p < .001; |d| = -0.677) and after (0.00 ± 0.00 vs. 2.80 ± 2.83, p < .001; |d| = -0.718) nasoenteral catheterization compared to the CG.

CONCLUSION

Spraying 10% lidocaine spray before nasoenteral catheterization was most effective for relieving discomfort and pain, with lower pain and discomfort recorded in NRS and VAS. Topical administration of 10% lidocaine spray is therefore a suggested measure for procedural pain relief related to nasoenteral catheterization.

SIGNIFICANCE

The use of 10% lidocaine spray was more effective in relieving procedural pain and discomfort during nasoenteral catheterization. Patients who received 10% lidocaine spray registered lower discomfort and pain scores than those from 2% lidocaine gel group; there were less complications among patients in the IG.

Does intraperitoneal ropivacaine reduce postoperative inflammation? A prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative inflammation is a common consequence of surgery and the ensuing stress response. Local anesthetics have anti-inflammatory properties. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate if LA administrated intraperitoneally perioperatively might inhibit expression of inflammatory cytokines.

METHODS

This was a, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study (ClinicalTrial.gov reg no: NCT02256228) in patients undergoing surgery for ovarian cancer. Patients were randomized to receive: intraperitoneal ropivacaine (Group IPLA) or saline (Group P) perioperatively. Except for study drug, patients were treated similarly. At the end of surgery, a multi-port catheter was inserted intraperitoneally, and ropivacaine 2 mg/mL or 0.9% saline, 10 mL was injected intermittently every other hour during 72 hours postoperatively. Systemic expression of cytokines and plasma ropivacaine were determined before and 6, 24, and 48 hours after surgery. Stress response was measured by serum glucose, cortisol, and insulin.

RESULTS

Forty patients were recruited, 20 in each group. There was no statistical significant difference in systemic cytokine between the groups at any time point. Serum cortisol was significantly lower in the IPLA group at 6 hours, median 103 nmol/L (IQR 53-250) compared to placebo, median 440 nmol/L (IQR 115-885), P = 0.023. Serum glucose and insulin were similar between the groups. Total and free serum concentrations of ropivacaine were well below toxic concentrations.

CONCLUSION

In this small study, perioperative intraperitoneal ropivacaine did not reduce the systemic inflammatory response associated with major abdominal surgery. Total and free ropivacaine concentrations were below known toxic concentrations in humans.

Rectus sheath single-injection blocks: a study to quantify local anaesthetic absorption using serial ultrasound measurements and lidocaine serum concentrations

Objectives

Rectus sheath blocks are an established option for analgesia following abdominal surgery, but pharmacokinetic data are limited. This study sought to characterise the absorption of lidocaine injectate and the pharmacokinetics of lidocaine after rectus sheath injection.

Methods

Bilateral rectus sheath single-injection blocks were given to 10 patients undergoing general or urological surgery. Afterwards, serial lidocaine serum levels and ultrasound measurements of the rectus sheath injectate reservoir were collected.

Key findings

Injectate within the rectus sheath was visible with ultrasound up to 12 h after injection. However, the rate of drug absorption exceeded that of injectate disappearance. Peak serum concentration occurred within 30 min with average peak concentrations of 1.65 μg/ml. Lidocaine clearance was lower than reported in young healthy subjects. The body mass index positively correlated with lidocaine terminal phase half-life, and clearance negatively correlated with age.

Conclusions

The study provides the first data describing lidocaine pharmacokinetics after rectus sheath injection. Peak serum concentrations transiently achieved systemic levels associated with pain relief after a single bolus injection. The data from this study could be used to develop a regime using single shot rectus sheath blockade with a bolus of lidocaine followed by infusion using bilateral rectus sheath catheters.

Evaluation of lignocaine infusion on recovery profile, quality of recovery, and postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy

Background and Aims:

Multimodal analgesia entrains the use of drugs in perioperative period producing adequate pain relief without affecting the quality of recovery by decreasing drug-related adverse effects. Systemic lignocaine has effective analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-hyperalgesic properties and improves the quality of recovery after surgery.

Material and Methods:

Ninety women scheduled for elective transabdominal hysterectomy under general anesthesia were randomized to receive infusion of lignocaine (1.5 mg/kg over 15 min followed by a 2 mg/kg/h infusion until the end of surgery) (Group 1) or normal saline (10 mL over 15 min followed by infusion 1 mL/kg/h till end of surgery) (Group 2). Standard anesthesia techniques were used in both the groups. The patients received inj. tramadol for postoperative analgesia. Perioperative hemodynamics, extubation variables, postoperative analgesic requirement, and quality of recovery score were evaluated.

Results:

Hemodynamics were maintained in both the groups. Time for extubation was also similar. Demand for first postoperative analgesic was after 70.8 ± 70.4 min (Group 1) and 40.7 ± 30.0 min (Group 2) (P = 0.006). Total tramadol usage was 477.0 ± 133.2 mg (Group 1) and 560.0 ± 115.0 mg (Group 2) (P < 0.001). Return of bowel function was faster in Group 2 compared with Group 1 (37.1 ± 5 vs 41.8 ± 7.4 h, P < 0.001). The median (interquartile range) recovery score (QoR-40) was 184 (178–191) in Group 1 and 178 (171–180) in Group 2 (P < 0.001).

Conclusion:

Perioperative use of intravenous infusion of lignocaine is associated with decreased analgesic requirement postoperatively, and improved quality of recovery score signifying greater patient satisfaction.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Uterine contractility changes in a perfused swine uterus model induced by local anesthetics procaine, lidocaine, and ropivacaine

Background

Local anesthetics (LAs) are increasingly used as therapeutics due to their multiple molecular effects. They may be potential agents also in gynecology and reproductive medicine. The objective of this study was to investigate the contractility response of the perfused swine uterus to different concentrations of the LAs procaine, lidocaine, and ropivacaine.

Methods and findings

In an extracorporeal perfusion model with fresh swine uteri, effects of administered boli of these three LAs in concentrations of 0.1 mg/mL, 0.5 mg/mL and 1.0 mg/mL on uterine contractility and peristalsis were assessed using an intrauterine double-chip micro-catheter. A dose-dependent increase in intrauterine pressure (IUP) in the isthmus and corpus uteri was observed after the administration of the ester-LA procaine 0.1, 0.5, and 1.0%, which was not seen with lower concentrations, or buffer solution. An increase-decrease curve was found after increasing concentrations of the amide-LA lidocaine and ropivacaine, with an IUP plateau with 0.1 and 0.5%, and a decrease with 1% (p<0.01). All reactions were seen in both the isthmus and corpus uteri. The difference of the contractility pattern between ester- and amide-LA at 1% concentration was significant.

Conclusion

LAs dose-dependently modulate contractility in non-pregnant swine uteri. The amid-LAs lidocaine and ropivacaine reduce contractility in higher concentrations and may be used as therapeutics in disorders with increased uterine contractility, as dysmenorrhoea, endometriosis, and infertility. The multiple molecular effects of LAs may explain these effects. This in-vitro pilot study in vitro provides initial data for designing further studies to transfer the results onto humans.

Intravenous lidocaine as adjuvant to general anesthesia in renal surgery

The role of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion has been previously evaluated for pain relief, inflammatory response, and post-operative recovery, particularly in abdominal surgery. The present study is a randomized double-blinded trial in which we evaluated whether IV lidocaine infusion reduces isoflurane requirement, intraoperative remifentanil consumption and time to post-operative recovery in non-laparoscopic renal surgery. Sixty patients scheduled to undergo elective non-laparoscopic renal surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled to receive either systemic lidocaine infusion (group L: bolus 1.5 mg/kg followed by a continuous infusion at the rate of 2 mg/kg/hr until skin closure) or normal saline (0.9% NaCl solution) (Group C). The depth of anesthesia was monitored using the Bispectral Index Scale (BIS), which is based on measurement of the patient’s cerebral electrical activity. Primary outcome of the study was End-tidal of isoflurane concentration (Et-Iso) at BIS values of 40–60. Secondary outcomes include remifentanil consumption during the operation and time to extubation. Et-Iso was significantly lower in group L than in group C (0.63% ± 0.10% vs 0.92% ± 0.11%, p < 10^–3). Mean remifentanil consumption of was significantly lower in group L than in group C (0.13 ± 0.04 µg/kg/min vs 0.18 ± 0.04 µg/kg/min, p < 10^–3). Thus, IV lidocaine infusion permits a reduction of 31% in isoflurane concentration requirement and 27% in the intraoperative remifentanil need. In addition, recovery from anesthesia and extubation time was shorter in group L (5.8 ± 1.8 min vs 7.9 ± 2.0 min, p < 10^–3). By reducing significantly isoflurane and remifentanil requirements during renal surgery, intravenous lidocaine could provide effective strategy to limit volatile agent and intraoperative opioids consumption especially in low and middle income countries.

Influence of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine on perioperative opioid consumption in laparoscopic intestine resection: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Objective

The consumption of opioid analgesics could be reduced by the use of analgesics with different mechanisms of action. We investigated whether additional treatment with dexmedetomidine or lidocaine could reduce opioid consumption.

Methods

We randomized 59 study participants into three groups and examined: (i) fentanyl consumption, (ii) consumption of piritramide, and (iii) cognitive function and neuropathic pain. The control group received continuous propofol infusion and fentanyl boluses. Continuous intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg/h) was administered to the dexmedetomidine group and lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg/h) was administered to the lidocaine group.

Results

No reduction in fentanyl consumption was observed among the groups. However, we noted a significantly lower consumption of piritramide on the first and second postoperative day in the lidocaine group. Total consumption of piritramide was significantly lower in the lidocaine group compared with the control group.

Conclusions

Lidocaine and dexmedetomidine reduced intraoperative propofol consumption, while lidocaine reduced postoperative piritramide consumption.

Clinical trial registration: NCT02616523

Persistent Postsurgical Pain

The development of chronic pain is considered a major complication after surgery. Basic science research in animal models helps us understand the transition from acute to chronic pain by identifying the numerous molecular and cellular changes that occur in the peripheral and central nervous systems. It is now well recognized that inflammation and nerve injury lead to long-term synaptic plasticity that amplifies and also maintains pain signaling, a phenomenon referred to as pain sensitization. In the context of surgery in humans, pain sensitization is both responsible for an increase in postoperative pain via the expression of wound hyperalgesia and considered a critical factor for the development of persistent postsurgical pain. Using specific drugs that block the processes of pain sensitization reduces postoperative pain and prevents the development of persistent postoperative pain. This narrative review of the literature describes clinical investigations evaluating different preventative pharmacologic strategies that are routinely used by anesthesiologists in their daily clinical practices for preventing persistent postoperative pain. Nevertheless, further efforts are needed in both basic and clinical science research to identify preclinical models and novel therapeutics targets. There remains a need for more patient numbers in clinical research, for more reliable data, and for the development of the safest and the most effective strategies to limit the incidence of persistent postoperative pain.

Designing the ideal perioperative pain management plan starts with multimodal analgesia

Multimodal analgesia is defined as the use of more than one pharmacological class of analgesic medication targeting different receptors along the pain pathway with the goal of improving analgesia while reducing individual class-related side effects. Evidence today supports the routine use of multimodal analgesia in the perioperative period to eliminate the over-reliance on opioids for pain control and to reduce opioid-related adverse events. A multimodal analgesic protocol should be surgery-specific, functioning more like a checklist than a recipe, with options to tailor to the individual patient. Elements of this protocol may include opioids, non-opioid systemic analgesics like acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, gabapentinoids, ketamine, and local anesthetics administered by infiltration, regional block, or the intravenous route. While implementation of multimodal analgesic protocols perioperatively is recommended as an intervention to decrease the prevalence of long-term opioid use following surgery, the concurrent crisis of drug shortages presents an additional challenge. Anesthesiologists and acute pain medicine specialists will need to advocate locally and nationally to ensure a steady supply of analgesic medications and in-class alternatives for their patients’ perioperative pain management.

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

BACKGROUND

Due to its potential beneficial effects, intra- and postoperative application of intravenous lidocaine has become increasingly accepted over the last couple of years, e.g. in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgical procedures. Based on its beneficial properties, lidocaine was introduced to the standard of care for all pediatric laparoscopic procedures in our institution in mid-2016. In contrast to adult care, scarce data is available regarding the use of perioperative intravenous lidocaine administration in children undergoing laparoscopic procedures, such as an appendectomy.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of all pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy at the University Children's Hospital Zurich in 2016. Perioperative data, as recorded in the electronic patient data management system, were evaluated for any signs of systemic lidocaine toxicity (neurological and cardiovascular), behavioral deterioration, as well as for hemodynamic instability. Additionally, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, administration of pain rescue medication, time to hospital discharge and to first bowel movement, as well as any postoperative complications were recorded. Starting on 01/07/2016, all patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery received intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg body weight (BW) bolus after induction of anesthesia followed by continuous infusion of 1.5 mg/kgBW/h). These patients were then compared to children without lidocaine administration who had undergone laparoscopic appendectomy between 01/01/2016 and 30/06/2016.

RESULTS

Data of 116 patients was analyzed. Of these, 60 patients received lidocaine. No signs of systemic toxicity, neurologic impairment or circulatory disturbances were noted in any of these patients. A (non-significant) difference in the incidence of emergence delirium was observed (0 cases in the lidocaine group vs. 4 cases in the control group, p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective analysis did not reveal any adverse effects in pediatric patients receiving intravenous lidocaine for laparoscopic appendectomy under general anesthesia. However, further trials investigating beneficial effects as well as pharmacokinetic properties of intravenous lidocaine in children are required.

Local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for preventing persistent postoperative pain in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Regional anaesthesia may reduce the rate of persistent postoperative pain (PPP), a frequent and debilitating condition. This review was originally published in 2012 and updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for the prevention of PPP beyond three months in adults and children undergoing elective surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to December 2016 without any language restriction. We used a combination of free text search and controlled vocabulary search. We limited results to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We updated this search in December 2017, but these results have not yet been incorporated in the review. We conducted a handsearch in reference lists of included studies, review articles and conference abstracts. We searched the PROSPERO systematic review registry for related systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing local or regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia with a pain outcome beyond three months after elective, non-orthopaedic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data and adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. We presented outcomes as pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), based on random-effects models (inverse variance method). We analysed studies separately by surgical intervention, but pooled outcomes reported at different follow-up intervals. We compared our results to Bayesian and classical (frequentist) models. We investigated heterogeneity. We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we identified 40 new RCTs and seven ongoing studies. In total, we included 63 RCTs in the review, but we were only able to synthesize data on regional anaesthesia for the prevention of PPP beyond three months after surgery from 39 studies, enrolling a total of 3027 participants in our inclusive analysis.Evidence synthesis of seven RCTs favoured epidural anaesthesia for thoracotomy, suggesting the odds of having PPP three to 18 months following an epidural for thoracotomy were 0.52 compared to not having an epidural (OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.84, 499 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Simlarly, evidence synthesis of 18 RCTs favoured regional anaesthesia for the prevention of persistent pain three to 12 months after breast cancer surgery with an OR of 0.43 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.68, 1297 participants, low-quality evidence). Pooling data at three to 8 months after surgery from four RCTs favoured regional anaesthesia after caesarean section with an OR of 0.46, (95% CI 0.28 to 0.78; 551 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence synthesis of three RCTs investigating continuous infusion with local anaesthetic for the prevention of PPP three to 55 months after iliac crest bone graft harvesting (ICBG) was inconclusive (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.09; 123 participants, low-quality evidence). However, evidence synthesis of two RCTs also favoured the infusion of intravenous local anaesthetics for the prevention of PPP three to six months after breast cancer surgery with an OR of 0.24 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.69, 97 participants, moderate-quality evidence).We did not synthesize evidence for the surgical subgroups of limb amputation, hernia repair, cardiac surgery and laparotomy. We could not pool evidence for adverse effects because the included studies did not examine them systematically, and reported them sparsely. Clinical heterogeneity, attrition and sparse outcome data hampered evidence synthesis. High risk of bias from missing data and lack of blinding across a number of included studies reduced our confidence in the findings. Thus results must be interpreted with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that there is moderate-quality evidence that regional anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing PPP after three to 18 months after thoracotomy and three to 12 months after caesarean section. There is low-quality evidence that regional anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing PPP three to 12 months after breast cancer surgery. There is moderate evidence that intravenous infusion of local anaesthetics may reduce the risk of developing PPP three to six months after breast cancer surgery.Our conclusions are considerably weakened by the small size and number of studies, by performance bias, null bias, attrition and missing data. Larger, high-quality studies, including children, are needed. We caution that except for breast surgery, our evidence synthesis is based on only a few small studies. On a cautionary note, we cannot extend our conclusions to other surgical interventions or regional anaesthesia techniques, for example we cannot conclude that paravertebral block reduces the risk of PPP after thoracotomy. There are seven ongoing studies and 12 studies awaiting classification that may change the conclusions of the current review once they are published and incorporated.

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.

An Evidence-Based Opioid-Free Anesthetic Technique to Manage Perioperative and Periprocedural Pain

Background

The epidemic of opioid abuse is increasing, and the number of deaths secondary to opioid overdose is also increasing. Recent attention has focused on opioid prescribing and management of chronic pain. However, opioid use in perioperative and periprocedural patients, whether they have chronic pain or exhibit new persistent opioid abuse after a procedure, has received little attention.

Methods

We present an evidence-based technique that combines subanesthetic infusions of lidocaine and dexmedetomidine supplemented with other intravenous agents and a low dose of inhaled anesthetic.

Results

Based on evidence of drug action and interaction, an opioid-free anesthetic can be delivered successfully. We present the cases of 2 patients in whom the opioid-free anesthetic technique was used with a successful outcome, adequate pain management, and avoidance of opioid drugs.

Conclusion

This anesthetic prescription can be useful for opioid-naïve patients as well as for patients with chronic pain that is managed with opioids.

[Systemic effects of amide-linked local anesthetics : Old drugs, new magic bullets?]

Besides the well-known analgesic effects of amide-linked local anesthetics exerted via the inhibition of the voltage-gated sodium channel, these substances also possess a certain number of properties, which bear the potential to positively influence the outcome after surgery. The results of several experimental as well as clinical studies suggest the possibility of an enhanced recovery after surgery, reduction in the incidence of chronic pain, preservation of endothelial barrier function during acute lung injury and the prevention of metastasis of solid tumors by systemic effects of local anesthetic administration. Mechanistic studies were able to identify several "new targets", such as the inhibition of spinal glycine transporters or of inflammatory signaling as induced by tumor necrosis factor alpha. Further elucidation of these mechanistic pathways as well as the translation of these promising experimental results into clinical practice is a crucial component of research activities in the field of anesthesia.

Local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for preventing persistent postoperative pain in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Regional anaesthesia may reduce the rate of persistent postoperative pain (PPP), a frequent and debilitating condition. This review was originally published in 2012 and updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for the prevention of PPP beyond three months in adults and children undergoing elective surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to December 2016 without any language restriction. We used a combination of free text search and controlled vocabulary search. We limited results to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We updated this search in December 2017, but these results have not yet been incorporated in the review. We conducted a handsearch in reference lists of included studies, review articles and conference abstracts. We searched the PROSPERO systematic review registry for related systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing local or regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia with a pain outcome beyond three months after elective, non-orthopaedic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data and adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. We presented outcomes as pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), based on random-effects models (inverse variance method). We analysed studies separately by surgical intervention, but pooled outcomes reported at different follow-up intervals. We compared our results to Bayesian and classical (frequentist) models. We investigated heterogeneity. We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we identified 40 new RCTs and seven ongoing studies. In total, we included 63 RCTs in the review, but we were only able to synthesize data on regional anaesthesia for the prevention of PPP beyond three months after surgery from 41 studies, enrolling a total of 3143 participants in our inclusive analysis.Evidence synthesis of seven RCTs favoured epidural anaesthesia for thoracotomy, suggesting the odds of having PPP three to 18 months following an epidural for thoracotomy were 0.52 compared to not having an epidural (OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.84, 499 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Simlarly, evidence synthesis of 18 RCTs favoured regional anaesthesia for the prevention of persistent pain three to 12 months after breast cancer surgery with an OR of 0.43 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.68, 1297 participants, low-quality evidence). Pooling data at three to 8 months after surgery from four RCTs favoured regional anaesthesia after caesarean section with an OR of 0.46, (95% CI 0.28 to 0.78; 551 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence synthesis of three RCTs investigating continuous infusion with local anaesthetic for the prevention of PPP three to 55 months after iliac crest bone graft harvesting (ICBG) was inconclusive (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.09; 123 participants, low-quality evidence). However, evidence synthesis of two RCTs also favoured the infusion of intravenous local anaesthetics for the prevention of PPP three to six months after breast cancer surgery with an OR of 0.24 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.69, 97 participants, moderate-quality evidence).We did not synthesize evidence for the surgical subgroups of limb amputation, hernia repair, cardiac surgery and laparotomy. We could not pool evidence for adverse effects because the included studies did not examine them systematically, and reported them sparsely. Clinical heterogeneity, attrition and sparse outcome data hampered evidence synthesis. High risk of bias from missing data and lack of blinding across a number of included studies reduced our confidence in the findings. Thus results must be interpreted with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that there is moderate-quality evidence that regional anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing PPP after three to 18 months after thoracotomy and three to 12 months after caesarean section. There is low-quality evidence that regional anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing PPP three to 12 months after breast cancer surgery. There is moderate evidence that intravenous infusion of local anaesthetics may reduce the risk of developing PPP three to six months after breast cancer surgery.Our conclusions are considerably weakened by the small size and number of studies, by performance bias, null bias, attrition and missing data. Larger, high-quality studies, including children, are needed. We caution that except for breast surgery, our evidence synthesis is based on only a few small studies. On a cautionary note, we cannot extend our conclusions to other surgical interventions or regional anaesthesia techniques, for example we cannot conclude that paravertebral block reduces the risk of PPP after thoracotomy. There are seven ongoing studies and 12 studies awaiting classification that may change the conclusions of the current review once they are published and incorporated.

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.

Postoperative ileus following major colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus (POI) is characterized by delayed gastrointestinal recovery following surgery. Current knowledge of pathophysiology, clinical interventions and methodological challenges was reviewed to inform modern practice and future research.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed using search terms related to ileus and colorectal surgery. All RCTs involving an intervention to prevent or reduce POI published between 1990 and 2016 were identified. Grey literature, non-full-text manuscripts, and reanalyses of previous RCTs were excluded. Eligible articles were assessed using the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias.

RESULTS

Of 5614 studies screened, 86 eligible articles describing 88 RCTs were identified. Current knowledge of pathophysiology acknowledges neurogenic, inflammatory and pharmacological mechanisms, but much of the evidence arises from animal studies. The most common interventions tested were chewing gum (11 trials) and early enteral feeding (11), which are safe but of unclear benefit for actively reducing POI. Others, including thoracic epidural analgesia (8), systemic lidocaine (8) and peripheral μ antagonists (5), show benefit but require further investigation for safety and cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

POI is a common condition with no established definition, aetiology or treatment. According to current literature, minimally invasive surgery, protocol-driven recovery (including early feeding and opioid avoidance strategies) and measures to avoid major inflammatory events (such as anastomotic leak) offer the best chances of reducing POI.

Intravenous lidocaine infusions for 48 hours in open colorectal surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial

Background

Although intravenous (i.v.) lidocaine is used as a perioperative analgesic in abdominal surgery, evidence of efficacy is limited. The infusion dose and duration remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effect of a longer low-dose 48-hour infusion regimen on these outcomes.

Methods

Fifty-eight adults undergoing elective open colorectal surgery were randomized into the lidocaine group (1.5 mg/kg bolus followed by 1 mg/kg/h infusion for 48 hours) and control group. After surgery, patients were given a fentanyl patient-controlled analgesia machine and time to first bowel movement (primary outcome) and flatus were recorded. Postoperative pain scores and fentanyl consumption were assessed for 72 hours.

Results

There was no significant difference in time to first bowel movement (80.1 ± 42.2 vs. 82.5 ± 40.4 hours; P = 0.830), time to first flatus (64.7 ± 38.5 vs. 70.0 ± 31.2 hours; P = 0.568), length of hospital stay (9 [8–13] vs. 11 [9–14) days; P = 0.531], nor postoperative pain scores in the lidocaine vs. control groups. Cumulative opioid consumption was significantly lower in the lidocaine vs. the control group from 24 hours onwards. At 72 hours, cumulative opioid consumption (µg fentanyl) in the lidocaine group (1,570 [825–3,587]) was over 40% lower than in the placebo group (2,730 [1,778–5,327]; P = 0.039).

Conclusions

A 48-hour low-dose i.v. lidocaine infusion does not significantly speed the return of bowel function in patients undergoing elective open colorectal surgery. It was associated with reduced postoperative opioid consumption, but not with earlier hospital discharge, or lower pain scores.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Equine neutrophils and their role in ischemia reperfusion injury and lung inflammation

Horses are susceptible to a multitude of inflammatory conditions that are characterized by a strong neutrophilic response. Here, we review basic equine neutrophil biology and explore the role of neutrophils in inflammatory conditions with emphasis on intestinal ischemia and reperfusion injury and lung inflammation. In addition, unique aspects of equine neutrophil biology have been highlighted. Neutrophils comprise the highest proportion of circulating white blood cells in equine blood. The concentration of circulating equine neutrophils is a primary indicator of systemic inflammation. Additionally, equine neutrophils exposed to various stimulants develop "toxic" changes characterized as cytoplasmic basophilia, presence of Döhle bodies, cytoplasmic vacuolation and toxic granulation. In contrast to human neutrophils, equine neutrophils fail to undergo chemotaxis in response to the peptide N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine and are dependent on the addition of arachidonic acid due to reduced activity of phospholipase A₂ to synthesize leukotrienes as part of the arachidonic acid pathway. Understanding the biologic function of neutrophils in horses is integral to developing methods to modulate inflammation associated with ischemia reperfusion injury and lung disease.