Perioperative Use of Intravenous Lidocaine

Differential nerve blockade to explain anterior thoracic analgesia without sensory blockade after an erector spinae plane block may be wishful thinking

Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is currently used as a component of multimodal analgesic regimen in a multitude of indications but the mechanism by which it produces anterior thoracic analgesia remains a subject of controversy. This is primarily the result of ESPB's failure to consistently produce cutaneous sensory blockade (to pinprick and cold sensation) over the anterior hemithorax. Nevertheless, ESPB appears to provide 'clinically meaningful analgesia' in various clinical settings. Lately, it has been proposed that the discrepancy between clinical analgesia and cutaneous sensory blockade could be the result of differential nerve blockade at the level of the dorsal root ganglion. In particular, it is claimed that at a low concentration of local anesthetic, the C nerve fibers would be preferentially blocked than the Aδ nerve fibers. However, the proposal that isolated C fiber mediated analgesia with preserved Aδ fiber mediated cold and pinprick sensation after an ESPB is unlikely, has never been demonstrated and, thus, without sufficient evidence, cannot be attributed to the presumed analgesic effects of an ESPB.

Systemic lidocaine versus erector spinae plane block for improving quality of recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare intravenous lidocaine, ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB), and placebo on the quality of recovery and analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

DESIGN

A prospective, triple-arm, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial.

SETTING

A single tertiary academic medical center.

PATIENTS

126 adults aged 18-65 years undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups: intravenous lidocaine infusion (1.5 mg/kg bolus followed by 2 mg/kg/h) plus bilateral ESPB with saline (25 mL per side); bilateral ESPB with 0.25% ropivacaine (25 ml per side) plus placebo infusion; or bilateral ESPB with saline (25 ml per side) plus placebo infusion.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the 24-h postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score. The non-inferiority of lidocaine versus ESPB was assessed with a margin of -6 points and 97.5% confidence interval (CI). Secondary outcomes included 24-h area under the curve (AUC) for pain scores, morphine consumption, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

124 patients completed the study. Median (IQR) 24-h QoR-15 scores were 123 (117-127) for lidocaine, 124 (119-126) for ESPB, and 112 (108-117) for placebo. Lidocaine was non-inferior to ESPB (median difference  -1, 97.5% CI: -4 to ∞). Both lidocaine (median difference 9, 95% CI: 6-12, P < 0.001) and ESPB (median difference 10, 95% CI: 7-13, P < 0.001) were superior to placebo. AUC for pain scores and morphine use were lower with lidocaine and ESPB versus placebo (P < 0.001 for all), with no significant differences between lidocaine and ESPB. One ESPB patient reported a transient metallic taste; no other block-related complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, intravenous lidocaine provides a non-inferior quality of recovery compared to ESPB without requiring specialized regional anesthesia procedures. Lidocaine may offer a practical and accessible alternative within multimodal analgesia pathways.

Effect of an opioid-free anesthetic on postoperative opioid consumption after laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Opioid administration has the benefit of providing perioperative analgesia but is also associated with adverse effects. Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) may reduce postoperative opioid consumption and adverse effects after laparoscopic bariatric surgery. In this randomized controlled study, we hypothesized that an opioid-free anesthetic using lidocaine, ketamine, and dexmedetomidine would result in a clinically significant reduction in 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption when compared with an opioid-inclusive technique.

METHODS

Subjects presenting for laparoscopic or robotic bariatric surgery were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either standard opioid-inclusive anesthesia (group A: control) or OFA (group B: OFA). The primary outcome was opioid consumption in the first 24 hours postoperatively in oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores, patient-reported incidence of opioid-related adverse effects, hospital length of stay, patient satisfaction, and ongoing opioid use at 1 and 3 months after hospital discharge.

RESULTS

181 subjects, 86 from the control group and 95 from the OFA group, completed the study per protocol. Analysis of the primary outcome showed no significant difference in total opioid consumption at 24 hours between the two treatment groups (control: 52 OMEs vs OFA: 55 OMEs, p=0.49). No secondary outcomes showed statistically significant differences between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that an OFA protocol using dexmedetomidine, ketamine, and lidocaine for laparoscopic or robotic bariatric surgery was not associated with a reduction in 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption when compared with an opioid-inclusive technique using fentanyl.

Opioid-free versus opioid-based anesthesia in major spine surgery: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Major spine surgery is associated with severe postoperative pain and increased opioid consumption. Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is thought to provide adequate intraoperative analgesia with reduced postoperative opioid consumption. The aim of this study is to compare the impact of intraoperative OFA approach to the conventional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) on postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and related side effects in patients undergoing multilevel spinal fusion surgery.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients undergoing elective major spine surgery were randomly allocated to either receive intraoperative dexmedetomidine and lidocaine (OFA group) or fentanyl during induction and intraoperative remifentanil (OBA group). All patients received intraoperative sevoflurane, propofol, rocuronium, ketamine, dexamethasone, ondansetron and postoperative paracetamol and patient-controlled analgesia device set to deliver intravenous morphine for 48 hours after surgery. Postoperative pain was measured using numerical rating scale. Opioid side effects were documented, when present.

RESULTS

OFA group required less morphine in the first 24 hours post-surgery (17.28±12.25 mg versus 27.96±19.75 mg, P<0.05). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was significantly lower in the OFA group. More patients in the OFA group required antihypertensive medications compared to patients in the OBA group (P<0.05). In the post anesthesia care unit, OFA patients had a significantly longer stay than OBA patients (114.1±49.33 min versus 89.96±30.71 min, P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

OFA can be an alternative to OBA in patients undergoing multilevel spine fusion surgery. OFA reduces opioids consumption in the first 24 hours and PONV.

Use of IV Lidocaine Infusion Postoperatively Within the ERAS Surgical Population

PURPOSE

The aim of this project was to investigate whether opioid pain scores, postoperative opioid requirements, and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay were impacted when comparing a 24-hour intravenous lidocaine infusion versus postoperative discontinuation of the lidocaine infusion.

DESIGN

A retrospective chart review was used both before and after the discontinuation of postoperative lidocaine infusions for a quality improvement project.

METHODS

The project was carried out in the adult surgery PACU setting at a level 1 trauma center between April 2021 and September 2021. The sample included 100 adult patients who fell under surgical specialties that used enhanced recovery after surgery protocol. After approval was obtained, data was collected via an electronic chart review using an evaluation tool created by the project team.

FINDINGS

Between the five surgical specialties used for this review, the PACU length of stay variable was reduced only in the gynecology oncology service (P= .041). Additionally, the postoperative opioid requirements were significantly reduced in the surgical oncology service (P = .02). Comparing the groups as a whole, 50 participants who had a 24-hour continuous lidocaine infusion and 50 participants whose lidocaine infusion was discontinued before PACU admission had no statistically significant values with pain scores, postoperative opioid requirements, and PACU length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that a 24-hour lidocaine infusion did not impact this patient population's pain scores, postoperative opioid requirements, or PACU length of stay.

Effects of intravenous single-bolus lidocaine infusion versus intravenous single-bolus magnesium sulfate infusion on postoperative pain, emotional status, and quality of life in patients undergoing spine fusion surgery: a randomized study

BACKGROUND

We assessed the efficiency of intravenous adjuvants in decreasing opioid intake and pain scores after spine fusion surgery.

METHODS

This study included 120 patients aged 18-60 listed for spine fusion surgery under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly assigned to four groups: Group (Lidocaine): received IV lidocaine 4 mg/kg in 50 mL volume over 30 min. Group (Magnesium): received IV magnesium sulfate 30mg/kg in 50 mL volume over 30 min. Group (combined Lidocaine and Magnesium): received IV lidocaine 4 mg/kg in 50 mL volume over 30 min.+IV magnesium sulfate 30mg/kg in 50 mL volume over 30 min. Group (Control): received IV saline 50 mL. The time to the first request analgesia, the postoperative pain score, total analgesic use, patient satisfaction, anxiety, depression, mental state, quality of life, and side effects were measured.

RESULTS

The combined group had more extended time for the first analgesic request and fewer rescue analgesia doses than the other groups. NRS scores at rest or movement were statistically significantly lower in the lidocaine group and the combined group compared to the control group (P1, P3<0.05) at almost all times. This combination reduces anxiety and depression and improves overall health up to three months after a single infusion. The combined group had higher patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

A synergistic effect of a combination of lidocaine and magnesium sulfate on perioperative pain was found. It reduces analgesic consumption, depression, and anxiety and improves overall health up to three months after a single infusion dose.

Safety of perioperative intravenous lidocaine in liver surgery - A pilot study

Background and Aims

Perioperative lidocaine infusion has many interesting properties such as analgesic effects in the context of enhanced recovery after surgery. However, its use is limited in liver surgery due to its hepatic metabolism.

Material and Methods

This prospective, monocentric study was conducted from 2020 to 2021. Patients undergoing liver surgery were included. They received a lidocaine infusion protocol until the beginning of hepatic transection (bolus dose of 1.5 mg kg-1, then a continuous infusion of 2 mg kg-1 h-1). Plasma concentrations of lidocaine were measured four times during and after lidocaine infusion.

Results

Twenty subjects who underwent liver resection were analyzed. There was 35% of preexisting liver disease before tumor diagnosis, and 75% of liver resection was defined as "major hepatectomy." Plasmatic levels of lidocaine were in the therapeutic range. No blood sample showed a concentration above the toxicity threshold: 1.6 (1.3-2.1) μg ml-1 one hour after the start of infusion, 2.5 (1.7-2.8) μg ml-1 at the end of hepatic transection, 1.7 (1.3-2.0) μg ml-1 one hour after the end of infusion, and 1.2 (0.8-1.4) μg ml-1 at the end of surgery. Comparative analysis between the presence of a preexisting liver disease or not and the association of intraoperative vascular clamping or not did not show significant difference concerning lidocaine blood levels.

Conclusion

Perioperative lidocaine infusion seems safe in the field of liver surgery. Nevertheless, additional prospective studies need to assess the clinical usefulness in terms of analgesia and antitumoral effects.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

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

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Use of Perioperative Intravenous Lidocaine as Part of an Abdominal Surgery Enhanced Recovery Pathway Does Not Significantly Impact Postoperative Pain

BACKGROUND

The utility of perioperative intravenous lidocaine in improving postoperative pain control remains unclear. We aimed to compare postoperative pain outcomes in ERP abdominal surgery patients who did vs did not receive intravenous lidocaine. We hypothesized that patients receiving lidocaine would have lower postoperative pain scores and consume fewer opioids.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery at a single institution via an ERP from 2017 to 2018. Patients who received lidocaine in the 6 months prior to a lidocaine shortage were compared to those who did not receive lidocaine for 6 months following the shortage. The primary outcome measures were pain scores as measured on the visual analogue scale and opioid consumption as measured by oral morphine equivalents (OME).

RESULTS

We identified 1227 consecutive ERP abdominal surgery patients for inclusion (519 patients receiving lidocaine and 708 patients not receiving lidocaine). Demographics between the two cohorts were similar, with the following exceptions: more females, and more patients with a history of psychiatric diagnoses in the group that did not receive lidocaine. Adjusted, mixed linear models for both OME (P = .23) and pain scores (P = .51) found no difference between the lidocaine and no lidocaine groups.

DISCUSSION

In our study of ERP abdominal surgery patients, perioperative intravenous lidocaine did not offer improvement in postoperative pain scores or OME consumed. We therefore do not recommend the use of intravenous lidocaine as part of an ERP multimodal pain management strategy in abdominal surgery patients.

The analgesic effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for acute and chronic persistent postsurgical pain in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women and tumour resection carries a high prevalence of chronic persistent postsurgical pain (CPSP). Perioperative i.v. lidocaine infusion has been proposed as protective against CPSP; however, evidence of its benefits is conflicting. This review evaluates the effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for breast cancer surgery.

METHODS

Randomised trials comparing perioperative lidocaine infusions with parenteral analgesia in breast cancer surgery patients were sought. The two co-primary outcomes were the odds of CPSP at 3 and 6 months after operation. Secondary outcomes included rest pain at 1, 6, 12, and 24 h; analgesic consumption at 0-24 and 25-48 h; quality of recovery; opioid-related side-effects; and lidocaine infusion side-effects. Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) random effects modelling was used.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials (1039 patients; lidocaine: 518, control: 521) were included. Compared with control, perioperative lidocaine infusion did not decrease the odds of developing CPSP at 3 and 6 months. Lidocaine infusion improved postoperative pain at 1 h by a mean difference (95% confidence interval) of -0.65 cm (-0.73 to -0.57 cm) (P<0.0001); however, this difference was not clinically important (1.1 cm threshold). Similarly, lidocaine infusion reduced oral morphine consumption by 7.06 mg (-13.19 to -0.93) (P=0.029) over the first 24 h only; however, this difference was not clinically important (30 mg threshold). The groups were not different for any of the remaining outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results provide moderate-quality evidence that perioperative lidocaine infusion does not reduce CPSP in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Routine use of lidocaine infusions for perioperative analgesia and CPSP prevention is not supported in this population.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

PROSPERO CRD42023420888.

Lidocaine constant rate infusion in isoflurane anesthetized neonatal foals

Introduction

In horses, lidocaine infusion is administered intraoperatively for analgesia and for a reduction of inhalant anaesthetic requirement. The objective of the study was to describe the anaesthetic effects of lidocaine infusion in isoflurane anaesthetised foals.

Methods

Twelve foals (<3 weeks old) undergoing surgery were included in the study (LIDO group). Foals were premedicated with midazolam and butorphanol IV, anaesthesia was induced with ketamine and propofol IV and maintained with isoflurane. Lidocaine was administered intraoperatively at 0.05 mg/kg/min. Also, the anaesthetic records of 11 foals in which lidocaine was not administered intraoperatively were retrospectively evaluated and they were considered as a historical control group (HC). Heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and fraction of expired isoflurane were monitored continuously. Time of extubation, time to reach sternal recumbency and standing were recorded. The quality of recovery was assessed.

Results

HR decreased in both groups compared with baseline values and intraoperatively the differences were statistically significant (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03 respectively in the LIDO and HC groups). Intraoperatively the HR was significantly lower in the LIDO group (71.2 ± 13.4 bpm) compared with the HC group (87.1 ± 17.7 bpm) (p = 0.0236). The number of foals requiring inotropic support (LIDO n = 7 and HC n = 9) was not statistically associated with the treatment group (p = 0.371). The extubation time, the time to reach the sternal recumbency and the quality of recovery did not differ significantly between the two groups (p = 0.7 and p = 0.6 respectively).

Discussion

In conclusion, in anaesthetised foals the addition of lidocaine does not provide a sparing effect on isoflurane requirement, and it does not interfere with the quality of recovery, however it decreases significantly the HR, which is pivotal in foals for the maintenance of cardiac output and peripheral perfusion. Therefore, a continuous patient monitoring is essential.

A Review of the Lidocaine in the Perioperative Period

This review analyzes the controversies surrounding lidocaine (LIDO), a widely recognized local anesthetic, by exploring its multifaceted effects on pain control in the perioperative setting. The article critically analyzes debates about lidocaine's efficacy, safety, and optimal administration methods. While acknowledging its well-documented analgesic attributes, the text highlights the ongoing controversies in its application. The goal is to provide clinicians with a comprehensive understanding of the current discourse, enabling informed decisions about incorporating lidocaine into perioperative protocols. On the other hand, emphasizes the common uses of lidocaine and its potential role in personalized medicine. It discusses the medication's versatility, including its application in anesthesia, chronic pain, and cardiovascular diseases. The text recognizes lidocaine's widespread use in medical practice and its ability to be combined with other drugs, showcasing its adaptability for individualized treatments. Additionally, it explores the incorporation of lidocaine into hyaluronic acid injections and its impact on pharmacokinetics, signaling innovative approaches. The discussion centers on how lidocaine, within the realm of personalized medicine, can offer safer and more comfortable experiences for patients through tailored treatments.

Antinociceptive Agents as General Anesthetic Adjuncts: Supra-additive and Infra-additive Interactions

The hypothesis "General anesthesia consists of producing both loss of consciousness and the inhibition of noxious stimuli reaching the brain and causing arousal" was used as a basis for the review of published data on general anesthetic interactions with antinociceptive agents: opioids, α 2 adrenergic agonists, and systemic sodium channel blockers. This review is focused on a specific type of anesthetic interaction-the transformation of antinociceptive agents into general anesthetic adjuncts. The primary aim is to answer 2 questions. First, how does an antinociceptive agent transform the effect of an anesthetic in providing a certain component of anesthesia-hypnosis, immobility, or hemodynamic response to noxious stimulation? Second, does a combination of an anesthetic with an adjunct result in a simple summation of their respective effects or in a supra-additive or infra-additive interaction? The Medline database was searched for data describing the interactions of antinociceptive agents and general anesthetics. The following classes of antinociceptive agents were considered: opioids, α 2 adrenergic agonists, and systemic sodium channel blockers. Drugs used in combination with antinociceptive agents were general anesthetics and benzodiazepines. The following terms related to drug interactions were used: anesthetic interactions, synergy, antagonism, isobolographic analysis, response surface analysis, and fractional analysis. The interactions of antinociceptive agents with general anesthetics result in a decrease of general anesthetic requirements, which differ for each of the components of general anesthesia: hypnosis, immobility, and hemodynamic response to noxious stimulation. Most studies of the nature of anesthetic interactions are related to opioid-general anesthetic combinations, and their conclusions usually confirm supra-additivity.

The nuts and bolts of multimodal anaesthesia in the 21st century: a primer for clinicians

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review article explores the application of multimodal anaesthesia in general anaesthesia, particularly in conjunction with locoregional anaesthesia, specifically focusing on the importance of EEG monitoring. We provide an evidence-based guide for implementing multimodal anaesthesia, encompassing drug combinations, dosages, and EEG monitoring techniques, to ensure reliable intraoperative anaesthesia while minimizing adverse effects and improving patient outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Opioid-free and multimodal general anaesthesia have significantly reduced opioid addiction and chronic postoperative pain. However, the evidence supporting the effectiveness of these approaches is limited. This review attempts to integrate research from broader neuroscientific fields to generate new clinical hypotheses. It discusses the correlation between high-dose intraoperative opioids and increased postoperative opioid consumption and their impact on pain indices and readmission rates. Additionally, it explores the relationship between multimodal anaesthesia and pain processing models and investigates the potential effects of nonpharmacological interventions on preoperative anxiety and postoperative pain.

SUMMARY

The integration of EEG monitoring is crucial for guiding adequate multimodal anaesthesia and preventing excessive anaesthesia dosing. Furthermore, the review investigates the impact of combining regional and opioid-sparing general anaesthesia on perioperative EEG readings and anaesthetic depth. The findings have significant implications for clinical practice in optimizing multimodal anaesthesia techniques (Supplementary Digital Content 1: Video Abstract, http://links.lww.com/COAN/A96 ).

Propofol EC50 for inducing loss of consciousness in patients under combined epidural-general anesthesia or general anesthesia alone: a randomized double-blind study

Background

Combined epidural-general anesthesia (GA + EA) has been recommended as a preferred technique for both thoracic and abdominal surgery. The epidural anesthesia on the general anesthetic (GA) requirements has not been well investigated. Therefore, we conducted the present study to explore the predicted effect-site concentration of propofol (Ceprop) required for achieving the loss of consciousness (LOC) in 50% of patients (EC50) with or without epidural anesthesia.

Methods

Sixty patients scheduled for gastrectomy were randomized into the GA + EA group or GA alone group to receive general anesthesia alone. Ropivacaine 0.375% was used for epidural anesthesia to achieve a sensory level of T4 or above prior to the induction of general anesthesia. The EC50 of predicted Ceprop for LOC was determined by the up-down sequential method. The consumption of anesthetics, emergence time from anesthesia, and postoperative outcomes were also recorded and compared.

Results

The EC50 of predicted Ceprop for LOC was lower in the GA + EA group than in the GA alone group [2.97 (95% CI: 2.63-3.31) vs. 3.36 (95% CI: 3.19-3.53) μg mL-1, (p = 0.036)]. The consumption of anesthetics was lower in the GA + EA group than in the GA alone group (propofol: 0.11 ± 0.02 vs. 0.13 ± 0.02 mg kg-1 min-1, p = 0.014; remifentanil: 0.08 ± 0.03 vs. 0.14 ± 0.04 μg kg-1 min-1, p < 0.001). The emergence time was shorter in the GA + EA group than in the GA alone group (16.0 vs. 20.5 min, p = 0.013).

Conclusion

Concomitant epidural anesthesia reduced by 15% the EC50 of predicted Ceprop for LOC, decreased the consumptions of propofol and remifentanil during maintenance of anesthesia, and fastened recovery from anesthesia.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT05124704.

Intraoperative intravenous infusion of lidocaine increases total and small vessel densities of sublingual microcirculation: a randomized prospective pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Multiple organ failure can occur as a result of postoperative complications. Research has indicated that the underlying mechanism of organ dysfunction is a microcirculation disorder. Because of its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, lidocaine has the potential to improve microvascular blood flow. This study was performed to assess the effect of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on the microcirculation and determine the incidence of postoperative complications.

METHODS

In this prospective randomized double-blind pilot study, 12 patients scheduled for abdominal surgery were randomly allocated to receive an intraoperative infusion of either 1% lidocaine or the same volume of 0.9% sodium chloride solution. The microcirculation was monitored using sidestream dark-field imaging and the vascular occlusion test combined with near-infrared spectroscopy.

RESULTS

Lidocaine significantly increased the total vascular density and small vessel density after 2 hours of infusion, with preservation of 99% to 100% of the capillary perfusion in both groups. No patients developed organ failure.

CONCLUSIONS

An increase in vessel density may be beneficial in major abdominal surgeries because it is associated with better tissue perfusion and oxygen delivery. However, this finding requires further investigation in patients with increased surgical risk. Overall, this study indicates that lidocaine has potential to improve microvascular perfusion.Research Registry number: 9549 (https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#home/registrationdetails/650ffd27b3f547002bd7635f/).

The effect of intravenous lidocaine on postoperative cognitive dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) has been reported as a significant complication in elderly patients. Various methods have been proposed for reducing the incidence and severity of POCD. Intravenous lidocaine administration has been reported in the literature to reduce POCD, but the effect of lidocaine remains controversial.

METHODS

We screened Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (up to April 2022) databases following a search strategy for intravenous lidocaine on POCD. We also screened related bibliographies on lidocaine for POCD. Ten articles comprising 1517 patients were selected and analyzed. We divided the postoperative follow-up period as follows: short term (<30 days), medium term (30-90 days), and long term (>90 days).

OUTCOMES

We found that lidocaine could attenuate the overall incidence of POCD, especially in the short term. There were no differences between lidocaine and placebo on the overall severity of POCD.

CONCLUSION

Lidocaine administered intravenously could attenuate the overall incidence of POCD and its severity in the short term.

Simultaneous application of lidocaine and ketamine during ambulatory infusion therapy: a retrospective analysis

Background: Infusions with lidocaine or ketamine have been separately established in the treatment of chronic pain. This study aims to retrospectively evaluate the effect of combined infusions of lidocaine and ketamine. Materials & methods: Patient records were screened for receipt of combined ambulatory infusions of lidocaine and ketamine from 2012 through 2021. A scoring system was designed to assess pain response retrospectively. Results: A total of 319 patients were included. Median pain reduction in days was 10.00 (interquartile range: 13.25). Side effects were limited to the acute phase of infusions. A total of 41.4% of patients who received concomitant pain medication reported a dose reduction. Conclusion: Our data support combined infusions as a safe therapy option, with good short-, medium- and long-term reductions in pain and great heterogeneity in treatment response. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05103319).

Quadratus lumborum block and transversus abdominis plane block in laparoscopic nephrectomy: a meta-analysis

Aim: To study the efficacy of quadratus lumborum block (QLB) and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) in laparoscopic nephrectomy patients. Materials & methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for QLB and/or TAP technique compared with each other or a control. Results: Direct analysis of 24 h post-op pain score at rest for each compared with control showed significant reduction, QLB (mean differences [MD] [95% CI]: -1.12 [-1.87,-0.36]; p = 0.004) and TAP (MD [95% CI]: -0.36 [-0.59, -0.12]; p = 0.003). With movement both were respectively lower than control QLB (MD [95% CI]: -1.12 [-1.51, -0.72]; p = <0.0001) and TAP (MD [95% CI]: -0.50 [-0.95, -0.05]; p = 0.03). Moreover, QLB demonstrated less risk 24 h of post-op nausea vomiting (PONV) versus control (PONV; risk ratios [RR] [95% CI]: 0.64 [0.45,0.90]; p = 0.01). Conclusion: TAP and QLB reduce pain scores compared with control, whereas only QLB reduces PONV compared with control.

Clinical dosage of lidocaine does not impact the biomedical outcome of sepsis-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome in a porcine model

Background

Sepsis is a common disease in intensive care units worldwide, which is associated with high morbidity and mortality. This process is often associated with multiple organ failure including acute lung injury. Although massive research efforts have been made for decades, there is no specific therapy for sepsis to date. Early and best treatment is crucial. Lidocaine is a common local anesthetic and used worldwide. It blocks the fast voltage-gated sodium (Na+) channels in the neuronal cell membrane responsible for signal propagation. Recent studies show that lidocaine administered intravenously improves pulmonary function and protects pulmonary tissue in pigs under hemorrhagic shock, sepsis and under pulmonary surgery. The aim of this study is to show that lidocaine inhalative induces equivalent effects as lidocaine intravenously in pigs in a lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced sepsis with acute lung injury.

Methods

After approval of the local State and Institutional Animal Care Committee, to induce the septic inflammatory response a continuous infusion of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) was administered to the pigs in deep anesthesia. Following induction and stabilisation of sepsis, the study medication was randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) lidocaine intravenously, (2) lidocaine per inhalation and (3) sham group. All animals were monitored for 8 h using advanced and extended cardiorespiratory monitoring. Postmortem assessment included pulmonary mRNA expression of mediators of early inflammatory response (IL-6 & TNF-alpha), wet-to-dry ratio and lung histology.

Results

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was successfully induced after sepsis-induction with LPS in all three groups measured by a significant decrease in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio. Further, septic hemodynamic alterations were seen in all three groups. Leucocytes and platelets dropped statistically over time due to septic alterations in all groups. The wet-to-dry ratio and the lung histology showed no differences between the groups. Additionally, the pulmonary mRNA expression of the inflammatory mediators IL-6 and TNF-alpha showed no significant changes between the groups. The proposed anti-inflammatory and lung protective effects of lidocaine in sepsis-induced acute lung injury could not be proven in this study.

Lidocaine induces epithelial‑mesenchymal transition and aggravates cancer behaviors in non‑small cell lung cancer A549 cells

The effects of clinically relevant concentrations of lidocaine on epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and associated lung cancer behaviors have rarely been investigated. The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of lidocaine on EMT and its related phenomena, including chemoresistance. Lung cancer cell lines (A549 and LLC.LG) were incubated with various concentrations of lidocaine, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or both to test their effects on cell viability. Subsequently, the effects of lidocaine on various cell behaviors were assessed in vitro and in vivo using Transwell migration, colony-formation and anoikis-resistant cell aggregation assays, and human tumor cell metastasis in a chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) model quantitated by PCR analysis. Prototypical EMT markers and their molecular switch were analyzed using western blotting. In addition, a conditioned metastasis pathway was generated through Ingenuity Pathway Analysis. Based on these measured proteins (slug, vimentin and E-cadherin), the molecules involved and the alteration of genes associated with metastasis were predicted. Of note, clinically relevant concentrations of lidocaine did not affect lung cancer cell viability or alter the effects of 5-FU on cell survival; however, at this dose range, lidocaine attenuated the 5-FU-induced inhibitory effect on cell migration and promoted EMT. The expression levels of vimentin and Slug were upregulated, whereas the expression of E-cadherin was downregulated. EMT-associated anoikis resistance was also induced by lidocaine administration. In addition, portions of the lower CAM with a dense distribution of blood vessels exhibited markedly increased Alu expression 24 h following the inoculation of lidocaine-treated A549 cells on the upper CAM. Thus, at clinically relevant concentrations, lidocaine has the potential to aggravate cancer behaviors in non-small cell lung cancer cells. The phenomena accompanying lidocaine-aggravated migration and metastasis included altered prototypical EMT markers, anoikis-resistant cell aggregation and attenuation of the 5-FU-induced inhibitory effect on cell migration.

Guidelines on perioperative optimization protocol for the adult patient 2023

OBJECTIVE

The French Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine [Société Française d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation (SFAR)] aimed at providing guidelines for the implementation of perioperative optimization programs.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 29 experts from the SFAR was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the outset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence.

METHODS

Four fields were defined: 1) Generalities on perioperative optimization programs; 2) Preoperative measures; 3) Intraoperative measures and; 4) Postoperative measures. For each field, the objective of the recommendations was to answer a number of questions formulated according to the PICO model (population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes). Based on these questions, an extensive bibliographic search was carried out using predefined keywords according to PRISMA guidelines and analyzed using the GRADE® methodology. The recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE® methodology and then voted on by all the experts according to the GRADE grid method. As the GRADE® methodology could have been fully applied for the vast majority of questions, the recommendations were formulated using a "formalized expert recommendations" format.

RESULTS

The experts' work on synthesis and application of the GRADE® method resulted in 30 recommendations. Among the formalized recommendations, 19 were found to have a high level of evidence (GRADE 1±) and ten a low level of evidence (GRADE 2±). For one recommendation, the GRADE methodology could not be fully applied, resulting in an expert opinion. Two questions did not find any response in the literature. After two rounds of rating and several amendments, strong agreement was reached for all the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement among the experts was obtained to provide 30 recommendations for the elaboration and/or implementation of perioperative optimization programs in the highest number of surgical fields.

Frailty: the perioperative and anesthesia challenges of an emerging pandemic

Frailty is a complex and multisystem biological process characterized by reductions in physiological reserve. It is an increasingly common phenomena in the surgical population, and significantly impacts postoperative recovery. In this review, we will discuss the pathophysiology of frailty, as well as preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative considerations for frailty care. We will also discuss the different models of postoperative care, including enhanced recovery pathways, as well as elective critical care admission. With discoveries of new effective interventions, and advances in healthcare information technology, optimized pathways could be developed to provide the best care possible that meets the challenges of perioperative frailty.

Identifying risk factors for chronic postsurgical pain and preventive measures: a comprehensive update

INTRODUCTION

Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is a prevalent condition that can diminish health-related quality of life, cause functional deficits, and lead to patient distress. Rates of CPSP are higher for certain types of surgeries than others (thoracic, breast, or lower extremity amputations) but can occur after even uncomplicated minimally invasive procedures. CPSP has multiple mechanisms, but always starts as acute postsurgical pain, which involves inflammatory processes and may encompass direct or indirect neural injury. Risk factors for CPSP are largely known but many, such as female sex, younger age, or type of surgery, are not modifiable. The best strategy against CPSP is to quickly and effectively treat acute postoperative pain using a multimodal analgesic regimen that is safe, effective, and spares opioids.

AREAS COVERED

This is a narrative review of the literature.

EXPERT OPINION

Every surgical patient is at some risk for CPSP. Control of acute postoperative pain appears to be the most effective approach, but principles of good opioid stewardship should apply. The role of regional anesthetics as analgesics is gaining interest and may be appropriate for certain patients. Finally, patients should be better informed about their relative risk for CPSP.

Efficacy of prolonged intravenous lidocaine infusion for postoperative movement-evoked pain following hepatectomy: a double-blinded, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The analgesic effect of intravenous lidocaine varies with the duration of lidocaine infusion and surgery type. We tested the hypothesis that prolonged lidocaine infusion alleviates postoperative pain in patients recovering from hepatectomy over the first 3 postoperative days.

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective hepatectomy were randomly assigned to receive prolonged i.v. lidocaine treatment or placebo. The primary outcome was incidence of moderate-to-severe movement-evoked pain at 24 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included incidence of moderate-to-severe pain during movement and at rest throughout the first 3 postoperative days, postoperative opioid consumption, and pulmonary complications. Plasma lidocaine concentration was also monitored.

RESULTS

We enrolled 260 subjects. Intravenous lidocaine lowered the incidence of moderate-to-severe movement-evoked pain at 24 h and 48 h postoperatively (47.7% vs 67.7%, P=0.001; 38.5% vs 58.5%, P=0.001) and reduced movement-evoked pain scores (3.7 [1.7] vs 4.2 [1.6]; mean difference 0.5 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.1-0.9]; P=0.018) and morphine equivalent consumption (47.2 [16.7] mg vs 52.6 [19.2] mg; mean difference 5.4 mg [95% CI: 1.0-9.8]; P=0.016) at 24 h postoperatively. Lidocaine also lowered the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (23.1% vs 38.5%; P=0.007). Median plasma lidocaine concentrations were 1.5, 1.9, and 1.1 μg ml^-1 (inter-quartile ranges: 1.1-2.1, 1.4-2.6, and 0.8-1.6, respectively) after bolus injection, at the end of the surgery, and 24 h postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged intravenous lidocaine infusion reduced the incidence of moderate-to-severe movement-evoked pain for 48 h after hepatectomy. However, the reduction in pain scores and opioid consumption by lidocaine was below the minimal clinically important difference.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04295330.

Analgesic efficacy of systemic lidocaine using lean body mass based dosing regime versus placebo in bariatric surgery: a prospective, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, single centre study

BACKGROUND

Intravenous lidocaine is used as an adjuvant analgesic agent in perioperative settings. It has been investigated in various patient populations and surgical interventions, but there are limited data on its efficacy, particularly for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Obese patients are at high risk of postoperative respiratory complications and can be expected to benefit from anaesthetic techniques that minimise opioid administration.

METHODS

We studied administration of lidocaine hydrochloride 1% i.v. to general anaesthesia at a dose of 1.5 mg kg^-1 (lean body mass×1.28) or placebo in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Subjects randomly assigned to each group were surveyed for 48 h after surgery for experienced pain (primary outcome), and administered opioids, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), resumption of bowel function, and length of hospital stay (secondary outcomes).

RESULTS

We recruited and randomised 140 subjects to either the lidocaine or placebo group; 137 completed the study. Subjects with pain numeric rating scale (NRS) >3 within the first 4 h postoperatively were similar in both groups (proportion of any NRS >3 within first 4 h lidocaine group: 47/68 (69%) vs placebo group: 44/69 (63%), P=0.507; within first h P=0.177, within second h P=0.513, within third h P=0.145, within fourth h P=0.510). There was no difference in maximal pain score, opioid consumption, recovery of bowel function, incidence of PONV, or length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Lidocaine does not improve postoperative pain scores, analgesia, or any secondary outcomes in patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03667001.

Multimodal Analgesia and Intraoperative Neuromonitoring

Intraoperative neuromonitoring has been a valuable tool for ensuring the functional integrity of vital neural structures by providing real-time feedback to the operative team during procedures where neurological structures are at risk. Commonly used intravenous and inhaled anesthetic drugs are known to affect waveform parameters measured with various intraoperative neuromonitoring modalities. While the concept of opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia has gained popularity in recent years, the impact of such a strategy on intraoperative neuromonitoring remains poorly characterized, in contrast to the more well-established concepts and literature regarding the effects of other hypnotic agents on neuromonitoring quality. The purpose of this focused review is to provide an overview of the clinical evidence pertaining to the pharmacological interaction of certain multimodal analgesics with routine intraoperative neuromonitoring modalities.

A Systematic Review of the Usage of Lidocaine in Hip Replacement Surgery

Hip replacement procedures, professionally known as hip arthroplasty, are one of the most common orthopedic procedures. Due to the variation in this procedure, the use and types of anesthetics differ. One such commonly used anesthetic is lidocaine. Since there are currently no standardized or general procedures for the application of lidocaine for perioperative hip arthroplasty procedures, this review aims to delve into this topic. A literature review surrounding the key terms "hip replacement" and "lidocaine" was performed on PubMed. After reviewing 24 randomized control trials, statistical analyses between groups that had no lidocaine versus groups that did were performed. The results showed that there was no statistical significance between various age groups and the use of lidocaine. One percent (1%) and 2% injected into the lumbar region were the most commonly reported doses of lidocaine, with 2% often being the first test dose. Other conclusions were that lidocaine was used for general anesthesia for individuals that underwent hip arthroplasty due to an underlying condition (cauda equina syndrome, ankylosing spondylitis, etc.). Lidocaine was also used for postoperative pain relief, which is a potential concern from its addictive qualities. This investigation outlines the current stance and usage of lidocaine in perioperative hip arthroplasty while noting its limitations.

The effect of extubation in prone position on emergence and recovery in lumbar spinal surgery

BACKGROUND

Extubation of patients in supine position after prone operations may lead to unwanted effects on hemodynamic and respiratory parameters during emergence and recovery period. We aimed to observe the effects of prone position on emergence and recovery periods after prone surgery.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial was studied with sixty patients extubated either in prone position (30 patients) or in supine position (30 patients) after lumbar spinal surgery in tertiary educational hospitals. Heart rate, non-invasive arterial blood pressure, peripheral oxygen saturation and Bispectral Index values were measured, and recorded in all patients during operation, at the time an anesthetic agent was discontinued, before and after extubation. The number of the mouth suctioning, Aldrete recovery score, and Ricker agitation score were recorded together with the severity of cough during emergence and recovery. Incidents such as nausea, vomiting, respiratory failure, uncontrolled airway, and decreased saturation were also recorded.

RESULTS

Heart rate and mean arterial pressure values were significantly lower in the prone group during emergence and recovery period compared with the supine group (P<0.05). Aldrete Recovery Scores were higher in the prone group (P<0.001). The number of the mouth suctioning and the cough severity were lower in the prone group (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Extubation in the prone position provides a more comfortable emergence and recovery periods by less altering the hemodynamic and respiratory status with better recovery profile.

Transurethral lidocaine (100 mg) bladder irrigation (TULI100) reduces the incidence of catheter related bladder discomfort in transurethral resection of bladder tumors: A randomized, double blind, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURBT) surgeries requires post-resection catheterization for continuous irrigation of the bladder. This indwelling catheter is associated with distressing catheter-related bladder discomfort (CRBD) and increases postoperative pain and agitation.

OBJECTIVES

To prove the hypothesis that transurethral 100 mg lidocaine irrigation at the end of TURBT can reduce the frequency of moderate-to-severe postoperative CRBD.

METHODS

116 patients scheduled for TURBT were screened, 94 were recruited and completed the study. American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I-II adult patients, 20-75 years of age undergoing elective TURBT surgery under general anesthesia were included. Transurethral normal saline with 0.01% lidocaine (100 mg in 1 L NS) was used for irrigation 30 min before the completion of surgery in group L, while only normal saline was used for transurethral irrigation in group N. The main outcomes were frequency of CRBD, pain and patient satisfaction at 0, 1, 2, and 6 h postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients were analyzed in the study. The incidence of moderate-severe CRBD was significantly lower in group L as compared to group C at 0, 1, and 2 h (65.9% vs. 31.9%, p = 0.01; 31.9% vs. 10.6%, p = 0.012; 21.3% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.004, respectively). At the 6-h mark, the incidence of CRBD was lower in group L, although this did not achieve statistical significance (6.38% vs. 2.1%; p = 0.613).

CONCLUSION

Irrigation with 0.01% lidocaine (100 mg) towards the end of TURBT reduces the incidence of moderate-severe CRBD by 52% and increases patient satisfaction.

Effect of co-administration of intravenous lidocaine and dexmedetomidine on the recovery from laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Some evidences have reported that intravenous lidocaine and dexmedetomidine alone can improve the quality of recovery after surgery. The main purpose of our study to explore whether co-administration of lidocaine and dexmedetomidine infusion could further improve the quality of recovery after laparoscopic hysterectomy compared to either lidocaine or dexmedetomidine administration.

METHODS

A total of 160 subjects were randomly allocated to four groups: the control group (group C) received an equal volume of normal saline, the lidocaine group (group L) received lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 1.5 mg/kg/h for continuous infusion), the dexmedetomidine group (group D) received dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 0.4 µg/kg/h for continuous infusion), the lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine group (group LD) received lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 1.5 mg/kg/h for continuous infusion) and dexmedetomidine combined infusion (0.5 µg/kg for bolus over 10 minutes before induction of anesthesia, 0.4 µg/kg/h for continuous infusion). The primary endpoint was the quality of recovery-40 (QoR-40) scores on postoperative day 1 (POD1). The quality of sleep on POD1, remifentanil total dose, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, the number of patients with self-press the pump, time to open eye and extubation, length of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, the incidence of intraoperative bradycardia, hypotension, arrhythmias, hypoxemia in the PACU, and nausea or vomiting within 24 h after surgery were regarded as the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The total QoR-40 scores were significantly increased in groups L, D, and LD on POD1 compared with group C (all P<0.05). The total QoR-40 scores were the highest in group LD on POD1 compared to other three groups (all P<0.001). Sleep quality was significantly improved in group LD compared to other three groups on POD1 (all P<0.05). The VAS pain scores were obviously reduced at 8 h in group L and at 4, 8 h in group D after surgery compared to group C and were the lowest in group LD (all P<0.05). The number of patients with self-press the pump was significantly reduced in groups D and LD compared to group C (8(20.0%) and 27(67.5%), P<0.001; 2(5.0%) and 27(67.5%), P<0.001, respectively). Length of PACU stay significantly prolonged in groups D (21.7±3.0) and LD (25.5±4.0) compared to group C (19.6±3.3) (P=0.028, P<0.001). The incidence of intraoperative bradycardia was significantly higher in groups D and LD than in groups C and L (all P<0.001). The rate of hypoxemia was higher in groups D (55.0%) and LD (70.0%) than in groups C (15.0%) and L (20.0%) (all P<0.05). The incidence of nausea was lower in group LD (10.0%) than in group C (37.5%) (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Co-administration of lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine infusion improved to some extent the quality of recovery on POD1 compared to lidocaine and dexmedetomidine alone, but it significantly increased the incidence of intraoperative bradycardia and hypoxemia in the PACU, and prolonged the length of PACU stay.

Intravenous lidocaine simultaneously infused with sufentanil to accelerate gastrointestinal function recovery in patients after thoracolumbar surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled study

PURPOSE

Postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction is one of the common complications of surgery, especially after surgery for a thoracolumbar spinal fracture. Intravenous lidocaine is a potential method to improve postoperative gastrointestinal function in surgical patients, reduce opioid use and shorten hospital stays. The purpose of this study is to explore the effect of intravenous lidocaine on the recovery of gastrointestinal function in patients after thoracolumbar surgery.

METHODS

In this study, 48 eligible patients undergoing elective thoracolumbar spine fractures resection and internal fixation surgery were enrolled to receive intravenous injections of lidocaine in different concentrations during the perioperative period. Patients were randomly divided into three groups: control group (group A), low concentration of lidocaine group (group B) and high concentration of lidocaine group (group C), 16 patients in each group. First postoperative exhaust time, numbers of bowel sound at preoperative and postoperative 3, 6, 12, 24 h, pain scores at postoperative 0, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48 h, total sufentanil use in PACU and perioperative periods, postoperative hospital stay and analgesic remedy within postoperative 48 h were recorded and compared. The primary endpoints include: the time of first flatus passage after the operation, the number of bowel sounds per minute counted with stethoscope at 30 min before anesthesia induction and at 3, 6, 12 and 24 h postoperative. The secondary endpoints included: the pain scores at PACU (after entering into PACU), 3, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h postoperative, the amount of sufentanil administrated by intravenous push during operation and the numbers of patients needed rescuing sufentanil in PACU, and the numbers of patients needed administration of gastric motility drugs or non-steroidal analgesics at ward within 48 h postoperation, length of hospital stay (from the first day after surgery to discharge from hospital) and the incidence of adverse reactions.

RESULTS

Compared with group A, the first postoperative exhaust time in group B and C occurred much earlier (23.3 ± 11.0 h vs. 16.0 ± 6.6 h, 16.6 ± 5.1 h, P < 0.05). Compared with preoperation, the numbers of bowel sound significantly increased at 24 h postoperatively in group B, while group B at 6 h and group C at 6 and 24 h postoperatively had significantly more active bowel sounds compared to group A (P < 0.05). There were no remarkable differences in VAS scores within 12 h postoperatively among three groups, and however, significantly lower VAS scores were found at 12, 24 and 48 h postoperatively in group C when comparing to Group A (p < 0.05). There was no statistical significance in the incidence of postoperative flatulence and nausea and vomiting, the number of patients needed rescuing sufentanil in PACU, the length of postoperative hospital stay and the number of patients requiring non-steroidal analgesics at ward within 48 h postoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous lidocaine infusion together with patient-controlled analgesia of sufentanil expedited the early recovery of gastrointestinal function and improved analgesic quality of sefentanyl in patients undergoing thoracolumbar surgeries.

Security and efficacy of intravenous injection of lidocaine in major hepatic resection

Objective. To determine in dynamics the blood lidocaine concentration in the patients while performing major hepatic resection with its epidural and intravenous injection for intra– and postoperative anesthesia and to estimate the toxicity potential. Materials and methods. Into the investigation 27 patients were included, to whom hepatic resection with preservation of 30 – 60% of parenchyma was done. In all the patients multicomponent intraoperative anesthesia was applied. Depending on adjuvant used, the patients were divided into two groups: the first – 7 patients, in whom intravenous lidocaine injection was applied, and the second – 20 patients, in whom multicomponent anesthesia was added by thoracic epidural anesthesia. Results. In 2 h postoperatively a tendency towards enhanced blood concentration of lidocaine was observed by 28.8% after its epidural injection, comparing with intravenous injection – 2.37 and 1.84 mcg/ml (р=0.29) accordingly without principal difference in 14 h after the operation – 2.85 and 2.62 mcg/ml (р=0.76) accordingly. In no one patient toxic life–threatening reactions were registered. Conclusion. The adjuvant application of lidocaine for intra– and postoperative anesthesia, using intravenous and epidural introduction in major hepatic resection performance, do not lead to raising of the medicinal compound concentration in the blood higher than conventional toxic content. The blood concentration of the preparation while its epidural introduction may be higher, than in intravenous introduction, witnessing in favor of secureness of intravenous application of lidocaine and at the same time a statistically significant difference between indices of its concentration in various ways of introduction was not observed.

Efficacy of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection surgery: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are the most common complications following thoracoscopic surgery, resulting in increased hospital costs and perioperative mortality. Studies have shown that intravenous lidocaine infusion can exert its anti-inflammatory properties by reducing the release of proinflammatory cytokines. This study is designed to investigate whether intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion can reduce the incidence of PPCs in adult patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This single-centre, double-blinded study will enrol 366 patients scheduled for video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection surgery. Patients will be randomly assigned to the lidocaine or placebo infusion group in a 1: 1 ratio. The lidocaine group will receive lidocaine intravenously during the intraoperative period, while the placebo group will be administered normal saline at an equal volume, infusion rate and timing. The primary outcome is the incidence of PPCs within 7 days following surgery. The secondary outcomes are quality of postoperative recovery 40 scores; length of hospital stay (determined by the number of days from admission to discharge); incidence of moderate to severe pain within 24 and 48 hours at rest and when coughing; incidence of additional rescue analgesics use and incidence of adverse events.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital (approval no. 20222241). Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients before randomisation. The results of this trial will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2200061979.

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.

Fabrication of a controlled-release delivery system for relieving sciatica nerve pain using an ultrasound-responsive microcapsule

Lidocaine, a potent local anesthetic, is clinically used in nerve block and pain management. However, due to its short half-life, repeated administration is required. For this reason, here we designed and prepared a lidocaine-encapsulated polylactic acid-glycolic acid (Lidocaine@PLGA) microcapsule with ultrasound responsiveness to relieve the sciatica nerve pain. With a premixed membrane emulsification strategy, the fabricated lidocaine-embedded microcapsules possessed uniform particle size, good stability, injectability, and long-term sustained release both in vitro and in vivo. More importantly, Lidocaine@PLGA microcapsules had the function of ultrasonic responsive release, which made the drug release controllable with the effect of on-off administration. Our research showed that using ultrasound as a trigger switch could promote the rapid release of lidocaine from the microcapsules, achieving the dual effects of long-term sustained release and short-term ultrasound-triggered rapid release, which can enable the application of ultrasound-responsive Lidocaine@PLGA microcapsules to nerve root block and postoperative pain relief.

Intraoperative lidocaine infusion as a sole analgesic agent versus morphine in laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery

Background

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of intra-operative intra-venous (IV) lidocaine infusion compared to IV morphine, on the post-operative pain at rest, the intra-operative and post-operative morphine requirements, the sedation and the Modified Aldrete scores in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), the hemodynamic parameters; mean values of the mean blood pressure (MBP) and the heart rate (HR), the peri-operative changes in the SpO2, and the respiratory rate (RR) in laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass. Sixty patients ˃ 18 years old, with body mass index (BMI) ˃ 35 kg/m2, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status II or III, were randomly divided into 2 groups: the lidocaine (L) group patients received intra-operative IV lidocaine infusion, and the morphine (M) group patients received intra-operative IV morphine.

Results

The post-operative numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) at rest was statistically significant less in group L than in group M patients, in the post-operative 90 min in the PACU. This was reflected on the post-operative morphine requirements in the PACU, as 26.6% of patients in group M required morphine with a mean total dose of 10.8 mg. The mean values of the MBP and HR recorded after intubation were comparable between patients of both groups, indicating attenuation of the stress response to endotracheal intubation by both lidocaine and morphine. However, the mean values of the MBP and HR recorded after extubation were statistically significant lower in patients of group L, indicating the attenuation of the stress response to extubation by lidocaine. Patients in group M showed statistically significant lower mean values of the MBP; before pneumoperitoneum and after 15 min from the pneumoperitoneum, this was reflected on statistically significant higher mean values of the HR. Patients in group L showed statistically significant lower mean values of the MBP and the HR; at 30 and 45 min from the pneumoperitoneum. Patients in group L showed statistically significant lower mean values of the MBP; 60 min from the pneumoperitoneum, after release of pneumoperitoneum and in the PACU. Patients of both groups showed comparable mean values of the HR after 60 min from the pneumoperitoneum, after release of the pneumoperitoneum and in the PACU. No patient in either groups developed post-operative respiratory depression in the PACU. Patients in group L showed statistically significant higher median sedation score, which was reflected on statistically but not clinically significant less Modified Aldrete score in patients of group L.

Conclusions

In morbid obese patients, the intra-operative IV lidocaine infusion offered post-operative analgesia in the PACU, on the expense of a higher sedation score, which didn’t affect the Modified Aldrete score clinically, with attenuation of the stress response to endotracheal intubation and extubation.

Trial registrations

FMASU R16/2021. Registered 1st February 2021, with Clinical Trials Registry (NCT05150756) on 10/08/2021.

Mechanism-Based Pharmacological Treatment for Chronic Non-cancer Pain in Adolescents: Current Approaches and Future Directions

Chronic non-cancer pain in pediatrics is a widespread phenomenon that affects about 20% of adolescents (10-19 years old). Although interdisciplinary pain treatment programs, which often include pharmacological treatment, have emerged as the standard of care in management of this patient population, evidence regarding an optimal treatment is lacking. The efficacy and safety profiles of pharmacological treatments used to help adolescents suffering from chronic non-cancer pain remain understudied. This lack of evidence may increase polypharmacy and the risk of drug interactions and adverse events. This review examines evidence for the use of pharmacological treatments prescribed to treat chronic pain in adolescents (10-19 years old), with a focus on mechanism-based pharmacology. The objectives of this review are to: (a) review the evidence for mechanism-based pharmacological treatments for chronic non-cancer pain in adolescents and (b) describe the pharmacological agents that are commonly prescribed to manage chronic pain in adolescents, including dosage information, mechanism, and potential adverse effects. Pharmacological treatments should be used carefully with adolescents, ideally within an interdisciplinary treatment program that will incorporate physical rehabilitation, integrative medicine/active mind-body techniques, psychology, and global efforts to normalize daily activities.

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on the ED50 of propofol for inserting gastroscope without body movement in adult patients: a randomized, controlled study

Background

Circulatory and respiratory depression are common  problems that occur in propofol alone sedation during gastroscopy. As a widely used analgesic adjuvant, intravenous lidocaine can reduce the consumption of propofol during Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or colonoscopy. However, it is still unknown the median effective dose (ED₅₀) of propofol when combined with lidocaine intravenously. This study aimed to compare the ED₅₀ of propofol with or without intravenous lidocaine for inserting gastrointestinal endoscope successfully.

Methods

Fifty nine patients undergoing gastroscopy or gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy were randomly divided into control group (Group C, normal saline + propofol) or lidocaine group (Group L, lidocaine + propofol). Patients were initially injected a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine in Group L, whereas equivalent volume of 0.9% saline in Group C. Anaesthesia was then induced with a single bolus of propofol in all subjects. The induction dose of propofol was determined by the modified Dixon’s up-and-down method, and the initial dose was 1.5 mg/kg in both groups. The primary outcome was the ED₅₀ of propofol induction dose with or without intravenous lidocaine. The secondary outcomes were the induction time, the first propofol bolus time (FPBT: from MOAA/S score ≤ 1 to first rescue bolus propofol), and adverse events (AEs: hypoxemia, bradycardia, hypotension, and body movements).

Results

Totally, 59 patients were enrolled and completed this study. The ED₅₀ of propofol combined with lidocaine was 1.68 ± 0.11 mg/kg, significantly reduced compared with the normal saline group, 1.88 ± 0.13 mg/kg (P = 0.002). There was no statistical difference in induction time (P = 0.115) and the FPBT (P = 0.655) between the two groups. There was no significantly difference about the AEs between the two groups.

Conclusion

The ED₅₀ of propofol combined with intravenous lidocaine for successful endoscope insertion in adult patients, was 1.68 ± 0.11 mg/kg significantly reduced compared with the control group.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, No: ChiCTR2200059450. Registered on 29 April 2022. Prospective registration. http://www.chictr.org.cn.

Can intravenous lidocaine definitely attenuate propofol requirement and improve outcomes among colonoscopic patients under intravenous sedation?: A double-blinded, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Propofol-sparing effect of lidocaine has not been fully elucidated because propofol is usually mixed with many medications in anesthetic practice. Therefore, the study aimed to verify the additive effect of intravenous lidocaine to propofol without other sedative medications and control the depth of anesthesia using the bispectral index (BIS) during colonoscopy in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded controlled trial.

METHODS

Sixty-eight patients scheduled and undergoing colonoscopy were randomly allocated to receive intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg then 4 mg/kg/h) (Group L) or a similar volume of normal saline (Group C) with propofol administration guided by BIS monitoring. The primary outcome was total propofol requirements between group comparisons. The secondary outcomes included the number of hypoxemic periods, hemodynamic changes, duration in returning of BIS > 85, sedation scores, pain scores, postoperative opioid requirement, and patient satisfaction between group comparisons.

RESULTS

Intravenous lidocaine showed significantly reduced total propofol use (151.76 ± 50.78 mg vs 242.06 ± 50.86 mg, Group L vs Group C, respectively, P < .001). Duration in returning to BIS > 85, sedation scores, and patient satisfaction scores were significantly superior in Group L (P < .05). The number of hypoxemic episodes, changes of hemodynamic response, pain scores, and postoperative opioid requirement were similar in both groups. No adverse effects were detected in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous lidocaine produced a definitely effective reduced propofol requirement without other sedative agents and improved outcomes including patient satisfaction, duration in returning to BIS > 85, and sedation score during colonoscopy without adverse effects.

Effects of intravenous lidocaine on hypoxemia induced by propofol-based sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures: study protocol for a prospective, randomized, controlled trial

Background

Oxygen-desaturation episodes, blood pressure drops, and involuntary body movement are common problems that occur in propofol-based sedation in the procedure of painless gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. As a widely used analgesic adjuvant, intravenous lidocaine can reduce the consumption of propofol during ERCP or colonoscopy. However, it is still unknown how lidocaine affects the incidence of oxygen-desaturation episodes and cardiovascular events, and involuntary movement during painless GI endoscopy. Therefore, we aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of intravenous lidocaine in propofol-based sedation for GI endoscopy.

Methods

We will conduct a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, saline-controlled trial. A total number of 300 patients undergoing painless GI procedures will be enrolled and randomly divided into the lidocaine group (Group L) and the control group (Group C). After midazolam and sufentanil intravenous injection, a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine was immediately injected and followed by a continuous infusion of 4 mg/kg/h in the lidocaine group, whereas the same volumes of saline solution in the control group. Then, propofol was titrated to produce unconsciousness during the procedure. The primary outcome will be the incidence of oxygen-desaturation episodes. Secondary outcomes will be the incidence of involuntary body movement, discomfort symptoms, propofol consumption, endoscopist, and patient satisfaction.

Discussion

Propofol-based deep sedation without intubation is widely used in painless GI endoscopy. However, adverse events such as hypoxemia often occur clinically. We expect to assess the effect of lidocaine on reducing the incidence of oxygen-desaturation episodes, cardiovascular events, and involuntary body movement. We believe that the results of this trial will provide an effective and safe method for painless GI endoscopy.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100053818. Registered on 30 November 2021.

The effect of intravenous lidocaine on propofol dosage in painless bronchoscopy of patients with COPD

Background

We tested the hypothesis that intravenous (IV) lidocaine reduces propofol requirements in painless bronchoscopy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Methods

A total of 93 patients who underwent bronchoscopy were included in this randomized placebo-controlled study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. After the IV doses of nalbuphine, patients were given a bolus of propofol, which was titrated if necessary until loss of consciousness. Then patients were given IV lidocaine (2 mg/kg then 4 mg/kg/h) or the same volume of saline. The primary endpoint was the propofol requirements. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of hypoxemia, the incidence of cough during glottis examination, the systolic blood pressure (SBP) and heart rate (HR) during bronchoscopy procedures, the bronchoscopist's comforts, and the time for wakefulness before recovery.

Results

Lidocaine infusion resulted in a significant reduction in propofol requirements (p &lt; .0001), and the incidence of hypoxemia (p = .001) and cough (p = .003) during examination decreased significantly in the lidocaine group. During the examination, the fluctuation of SBP and HR was significantly lower than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (p &lt; .05). Bronchoscopist's comforts were higher in the lidocaine group (p &lt; .001), and time for wakefulness (p &lt; .001) were significantly lower in the lidocaine group.

Conclusion

In painless bronchoscopy in patients with COPD, IV infusion of lidocaine resulted in a reduction in propofol dose requirements and reduce the incidence of adverse events.

Evaluation of continuous intravenous lidocaine on brain relaxation, intraoperative opioid consumption, and surgeon's satisfaction in adult patients undergoing craniotomy tumor surgery: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In craniotomy tumor removal, brain relaxation after dura opening is essential. Lidocaine is known to have analgesic and antiinflammatory effects. It is excellent in decreasing cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen, cerebral blood flow, and cerebral blood volume; and can potentially reduce intracranial pressure, resulting in exceptional brain relaxation after dura opening. However, no study has examined continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion on brain relaxation, intraoperative opioid consumption and surgeon's satisfaction in adult patients undergoing craniotomy tumor removal.

METHODS

A total of 60 subjects scheduled for craniotomy tumor removal were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized controlled trial with consecutive sampling. Patients received either an intravenous bolus of lidocaine (2%) 1.5 mg/kg before induction followed by 2 mg/kg/h continuous infusion up to skin closure (lidocaine group) or placebo with similar volume (NaCl 0.9%). Neurosurgeons evaluated brain relaxation and surgeon's satisfaction with a 4-point scale, total intraoperative opioid consumption was recorded in μg and μg/kg/min.

RESULTS

All sixty subjects were included in the study. Lidocaine group showed better brain relaxation after dura opening (96.7% vs 70%; lidocaine vs placebo, P < .006), less intraoperative fentanyl consumption (369.2 μg vs 773.0 μg; P < .001, .0107 vs .0241 μg/kg/min; lidocaine vs placebo, P < .001). Higher surgeon's satisfaction was found in lidocaine group (96.7% vs 70%, P = .006). No side effects were observed during this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous lidocaine intravenous infusion improves brain relaxation after dura opening, and decreases intraoperative opioid consumption, with good surgeon satisfaction in adult patients undergoing craniotomy tumor removal.

Compatibility and stability of an admixture of multiple anaesthetic drugs for opioid-free anaesthesia

The ability to combine and use drugs in a single infusion device may be useful in resource-limited settings. This study examined the chemical stability of an opioid-sparing mixture of ketamine, lidocaine and magnesium sulphate when combined in a single syringe. High-performance liquid chromatography and atomic absorption spectrophotometry were performed on six syringes containing the three-drug mixture. Since most opioid-sparing techniques typically rely on a 24-hour infusion regime, we tested stability at the initial admixing and 24 hours later. Stability was defined as a measured drug concentration within 10% of expected, with the absence of precipitation or pH alterations. Pharmacokinetic simulations were conducted to further show that the achieved plasma drug concentrations were well within an effective analgesic range. All mixed drug concentration measurements were within the required 10% reference limit. No obvious precipitation or interaction occurred, and pH remained stable. Drug stability was maintained for 24 hours. Pharmacokinetic simulations showed that ketamine and lidocaine were within their minimum analgesic effect concentrations. Our results show that this three-drug mixture is chemically stable for up to 24 hours after mixing, with a pharmacokinetic simulation illustrating safe, clinically useful predicted plasma concentrations when using the described admixture.

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.

Intraoperative lidocaine infusion in patients undergoing pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer: a mechanistic, multicentre randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Intravenous lidocaine has been postulated to improve long-term survival after surgery for pancreatic cancer through anti-inflammatory effects, anti-tumour effects, or both. We investigated whether intraoperative lidocaine improves survival after pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer and whether lidocaine modified the formation of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs), high levels of which are associated with poor prognosis.

METHODS

Patients undergoing pancreatectomy were randomly assigned to i.v. lidocaine (continuous intraoperative infusion of 2 mg kg-1 h-1, after 1.5 mg kg-1 bolus at induction of anaesthesia) or saline placebo. The co-primary outcomes were survival/disease-free survival 3 yr after surgery. Secondary outcomes (masked to treatment allocation) included intraoperative opioid (sufentanil) dose, postoperative complications, and circulating and tumour-associated NETs (immunofluorescence assay, enzyme-linked immune assay, or both).

RESULTS

A total of 563 participants (34.6% female; median age, 64 yr) completed 3 yr of clinical follow-up. Overall, 283 participants were randomised to lidocaine infusion, and 280 participants were randomised to placebo. Infusion of lidocaine did not alter overall (hazard ratio [HR]=0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.17; P=0.79) or disease-free survival (HR=0.91; 95% CI, 0.71-1.17; P=0.44). Mean intraoperative sufentanil dose was reduced by lidocaine infusion (47.6 μg [4.6]) compared with placebo (68.4 μg [4.8]; P<0.001), but postoperative complications and length of hospital stay were similar between groups. Circulating NETs were lower after lidocaine infusion up to 3 days after surgery, but tumour-associated NETs were not altered by intraoperative treatment.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer, intraoperative infusion of lidocaine did not improve overall or disease-free survival. Reduced formation of circulating NETs was absent in pancreatic tumour tissue.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03245346; updated in Chi-CTR-2000035469.

Is Multimodal Anesthesia Effecting Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy?

Background: Multimodal anesthesia represents a technique that can improve analgesia and lower the occurrence of opioid side effects in the postoperative period, such as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). It can be achieved by providing different types of medication during the intraoperative period which can decrease the need for opioids. PONV happens more often in patients who have received large amounts of opioids during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In this study, our aim was to observe the occurrence of PONV between three different groups of patients who received lidocaine, ketamine and magnesium sulfate in combination with fentanyl in the intraoperative period. We also observed any additional nausea and vomiting in the three groups as well as the amount of fentanyl given to these groups during operation. Materials and methods: 120 patients aged 20-65 years old were included in this randomized and prospective study, ASA classification 1 and 2, scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were classified into three groups randomly: Group 1 (lidocaine group-LG), these patients received lidocaine at 1 mg/kg during induction to general anesthesia and 2 mg/kg/h after intubation in continuous intravenous infusion; Group 2 (ketamine group-KG) these patients received ketamine at 0.5 mg/kg during induction to general anesthesia; and Group 3 (magnesium group-MG) these patients received magnesium sulfate at 1.5 gr/hr as a continuous intravenous infusion after intubation. In all three groups, patients additionally received bolus doses of fentanyl. Postoperative nausea and vomiting were monitored in all three groups at 1, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after surgery as a primary objective, and if patients had complainant of vomiting, they were treated with 10 mg of metoclopramid. Between the five control time points, additional nausea and vomiting was recorded as well, as a secondary objective. The third objective was to measure of the total amount of fentanyl given in the intraoperative period. Results: Patients from the lidocaine group experienced less PONV and they received less fentanyl compared to patients of ketamine and magnesium groups. Patients from the ketamine group had more nausea than other groups. In the magnesium group, the rate of vomiting was higher, and they received higher amounts of fentanyl during surgery. Additional nausea and vomiting occurred in 3 patients in the LG, 2 in the KG, and 3 in the MG between the five control time points. The patients from the magnesium group received the highest dose of fentanyl during surgery (307.50 ± 130.4), followed by the patients from the ketamine group (292.50 ± 60.5), and then patients from the lidocaine group (258.75 ± 60.9). The doses of fentanyl that patients received during surgery in all three groups were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Multimodal anesthesia has been shown to lower PONV 24 hours after laparoscopic cholecystectomy and can lower need for opioids during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.