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

Effects of intravenous lidocaine on postoperative pain and gastrointestinal function recovery following gastrointestinal surgery: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The full extent of intravenous lidocaine's effectiveness in alleviating postoperative pain and enhancing gastrointestinal function recovery remains uncertain.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted an exhaustive search of databases to identify randomized controlled trials that compared intravenous lidocaine infusion's efficacy to that of a placebo or routine care in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. The primary outcome measure was resting pain scores 24 h postoperatively. We utilized a random-effects model based on the intention-to-treat principle for the overall results.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

This study included twenty-four trials with 1533 patients. Intravenous lidocaine significantly reduced resting pain scores 24 h after gastrointestinal surgery (twenty trials, SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.09 to -0.24, P=0.002, I2 = 90%). This finding was consistent in subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses. The benefit was also observed at other resting and moving time points (1, 2, 4, and 12 h) postoperatively. Intravenous lidocaine significantly decreased opioid consumption within 24 h after surgery (eleven trials, SMD: -1.19; 95% CI: -1.99 to -0.39; P=0.003). Intravenous lidocaine also shortened the time to bowel sound (MD: -8.51; 95% CI: -14.59 to -2.44; P=0.006), time to first flatus (MD: -6.00; 95% CI: -9.87 to -2.13; P=0.002), and time to first defecation (MD: -9.77; 95% CI: -17.19 to -2.36; P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine can alleviate acute pain and expedite gastrointestinal function recovery in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to substantial heterogeneity. Further large-scale studies are necessary to validate these findings.

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.

Pain management after open colorectal surgery: An update of the systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) recommendations

BACKGROUND

Open colectomy is still performed around the world and associated with significant postoperative pain.

OBJECTIVES

Unpublished recommendations based on a systematic review were proposed by the PROcedure SPECific postoperative pain managemenT (PROSPECT) group in 2016. We aimed to update these recommendations by evaluating the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after open colectomy according to the PROSPECT methodology.

DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES

A systematic review using the PROSPECT methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published in the English language from 2016 to 2022 assessing postoperative pain after open colectomy using analgesic, anaesthetic or surgical interventions were identified. The primary outcome included postoperative pain scores.

RESULTS

The previous 2016 review included data from 93 studies. Out of 842 additional eligible studies identified, 13 new studies were finally retrieved for analysis. Intra-operative and postoperative interventions that improved postoperative pain were paracetamol, epidural analgesia. When epidural is not feasible, intravenous lidocaine or bilateral TAP block or postoperative continuous pre-peritoneal infusion are recommended. Intra-operative and postoperative Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 specific-inhibitors or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended for colonic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic regimen for open colectomy should include intra-operative paracetamol and COX-2 specific inhibitors or NSAIDs (restricted to colonic surgery), epidural and continued postoperatively with opioids used as rescue analgesics. If epidural is not feasible, bilateral TAP block or IV lidocaine are recommended. Safety issues should be highlighted: local anaesthetics should not be administered by two different routes at the same time. Because of the risk of toxicity, careful dosing and monitoring are necessary.

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.

The Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine, Ketamine, and Lidocaine-Ketamine Combination in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Colorectal resections are associated with a pronounced inflammatory response, severe postoperative pain, and postoperative ileus. The aim of this study was to evaluate the main effects of lidocaine and ketamine, and their interaction in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients after open surgery. The interaction could be additive if the effect of 2 drugs given in combination equals the sum of their individual effects, or multiplicative if their combined effect exceeds the sum of their individual effects. We hypothesized that the combination of lidocaine and ketamine might reduce the inflammatory response additively or synergistically.

METHODS

Eighty-two patients undergoing elective open colorectal resection were randomized to receive either lidocaine or placebo and either ketamine or placebo in a 2 × 2 factorial design. After induction of general anesthesia, all subjects received an intravenous bolus (lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg and/or ketamine 0.5 mg/kg and/or a matched saline volume) followed by a continuous infusion (lidocaine 2 mg·kg-1·h-1 and/or ketamine 0.2 mg·kg-1·h-1 and/or a matched saline volume) until the end of surgery. Primary outcomes were serum levels of white blood cell (WBC) count, interleukins (IL-6, IL-8), and C-reactive protein (CRP) measured at 2 time points: 12 and 36 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative opioid consumption; visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at 2, 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours postoperatively; cumulative analgesic consumption within 48 hours after surgery; and time to first bowel movement. We assessed the main effects of each of lidocaine and ketamine and their interaction on the primary outcomes using linear regression analyses. A Bonferroni-adjusted significance level was set at .05/8 = .00625 for primary analyses.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed with either lidocaine or ketamine intervention in any of the measured inflammatory markers. No multiplicative interaction between the 2 treatments was confirmed at 12 or 36 hours after surgery: WBC count, P = .870 and P = .393, respectively; IL-6, P = .892 and P = .343, respectively; IL-8, P = .999 and P = .996, respectively; and CRP, P = .014 and P = .445, respectively. With regard to inflammatory parameters, no evidence of additive interactions was found. Lidocaine and ketamine, either together or alone, significantly reduced intraoperative opioid consumption versus placebo, and, except for lidocaine alone, improved pain scores. Neither intervention significantly influenced gut motility.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study results do not support the use of an intraoperative combination of lidocaine and ketamine in patients undergoing open surgery for CRC.

Comparison of Quality of Recovery (QoR-15) following the administration of intravenous lignocaine and fentanyl in patients undergoing septoplasty under general anaesthesia: A double-blinded, randomised, controlled trial

Background and Aims

Recovery from surgery and anaesthesia is usually observed through conventional indicators. The Quality of Recovery (QoR-15) score was specially designed to measure psychometric and functional recovery from the patient's perspective. This study aimed to evaluate QoR-15 following the administration of intravenous (IV) lignocaine or IV fentanyl in patients undergoing septoplasty surgery.

Methods

This randomised, controlled trial was conducted on 64 patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II, of either sex, of ages between 18 and 60 years, and who were scheduled for septoplasty. The primary end point was to compare the quality of recovery following the administration of IV lignocaine(group L) and IV fentanyl (group F) using the QoR-15 score in patients undergoing septoplasty. Secondary end points were to compare postoperative analgesia, recovery characteristics, and adverse effects in both groups. Statistical analysis was done using the Shapiro-Wilk test, paired t test/ Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and unpaired t test/Mann-Whitney U test. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

There was a significant improvement in the postoperative QoR-15 score than in the preoperative score in both groups (P < 0.000). However, the postoperative QoR-15 score was significantly higher in group L compared to group F (P < 0.001). Total consumption of analgesic doses were reduced in group L (P=0.000). Time taken to achieve an Aldrete score >9 and gastrointestinal recovery was shorter in group L compared to group F.

Conclusion

Both IV lignocaine and IV fentanyl improved postoperative QoR-15 score; however, lignocaine had a higher postoperative QoR-15 score than fentanyl, in addition to showing early discharge readiness, better analgesia, and better recovery profile in patients following septoplasty surgery.

Appropriate Duration of Perioperative Intravenous Administration of Lidocaine to Provide Satisfactory Analgesia for Adult Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Perioperative lidocaine infusion has been reported to alleviate pain intensity after colorectal surgery. However, there is no consensus on whether prolonged lidocaine infusion is more effective than short lidocaine infusion. This meta-analysis aimed to determine an appropriate duration of lidocaine infusion in patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases to identify articles published before December 17, 2021. Randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous lidocaine with placebo for pain relief in patients undergoing colorectal surgery were included. The primary outcome was pain scores (visual analog scale [VAS], 0-10 cm) at 24 hours postoperatively at rest and on movement. Secondary outcomes included pain scores at 12, 48, and 72 hours postoperatively, analgesic consumption (mg), gastrointestinal function return (hour), length of hospital stay (days), and incidence of complications. According to the duration of lidocaine infusion, studies were grouped into infusion for at least 24 hours (prolonged lidocaine infusion) and less than 24 hours (short lidocaine infusion) to assess the impact of lidocaine infusion duration on the outcomes of interests. Quantitative analyses were performed using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with 548 patients were included. Five studies used prolonged lidocaine infusion, while 6 studies used short lidocaine infusion. Prolonged lidocaine infusion reduced postoperative pain scores versus placebo at 24 hours at rest (mean difference [MD], -0.91 cm; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.54 to -0.28; P = .02) and on movement (MD, -1.69 cm; 95% CI, -2.15 to -1.22; P < .001), while short lidocaine infusion showed no benefit. Compared with placebo, prolonged lidocaine infusion reduced pain scores at 12 hours at rest and at 12 and 48 hours on movement, but short lidocaine infusion did not. However, there was no significant difference in pain scores between the prolonged and short lidocaine infusion groups at these time points. Compared with placebo, prolonged lidocaine infusion shortened the length of hospital stay (MD, -1.30 days; 95% CI, -1.72 to -0.88; P < .001) and time to first postoperative defecation (MD, -12.51 hours; 95% CI, -22.67 to -2.34; P = .02). There were no differences between groups regarding the other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic effect of intravenous lidocaine may depend on the duration of infusion, and our results suggest that lidocaine infusion should be administered for at least 24 hours after colorectal surgery. Since overall evidence quality was low, further high-quality, large-sample trials are needed to explore an optimal lidocaine infusion strategy in patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

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.

Effect of perioperative lignocaine infusion on postoperative pain relief for laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair: A randomized controlled study

INTRODUCTION

The focus on enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and opioid-free anesthesia has renewed interest in use of lignocaine. We evaluated postoperative pain relief following intravenous (IV) lignocaine administration in patients undergoing laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM).

METHODS

Seventy patients were randomized into two groups. Group L patients were administered IV lignocaine infusion (1.5 mg/kg) at induction of anesthesia followed by infusion (1.5 mg/kg/h), until 1 hour in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Group P patients received equal volumes of normal saline IV infusion. We recorded hemodynamics, perioperative analgesic consumption, postoperative visual analog scores (VAS), incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), bowel function, patient satisfaction and length of hospital stay (LOS).

RESULTS

The hemodynamics in both groups were maintained. Group L had lower VAS scores as compared to Group P (P < .05). Intraoperative fentanyl consumption in Group L was significantly less than Group P (P = .029). Group L patients scored lower on the Likert scale in comparison to the patients of Group P at 0 hour (P = .013). Recovery of bowel function as assessed by time to pass first flatus was significantly shortened by IV lignocaine (P = .001). The perioperative administration of IV lignocaine resulted in decreased postoperative analgesic requirement and greater patient satisfaction scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative IV lignocaine infusion provided good pain relief, hemodynamic stability and decreased perioperative analgesic consumption. PONV incidence decreased along with an early return of bowel function, reduced LOS and improved patient satisfaction in patients undergoing laparoscopic IPOM surgery.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion With Thoracic Epidural for Perioperative Analgesia and Quality of Recovery After Surgery in Laparoscopic Left-Sided Colon and Sphincter-Sparing Rectal Resection Surgery

Background Protocols for Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) have been constantly evolving, and the best method of managing perioperative pain, especially in laparoscopic surgeries, is still debatable. The primary goal of these protocols is to steer toward opioid-sparing analgesia. Intravenous lidocaine, which has both analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties, may improve the overall recovery of patients. Objectives The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine infusion (IVL) with thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) in the management of perioperative pain and recovery in the laparoscopic left-sided colon and sphincter-sparing rectal surgery. Methods In this study, 37 patients were randomized to either the IVL group or the TEA group. IVL infusion was started before the surgical incision and stopped 30 minutes after transferring the patient to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, rescue analgesic doses, quality of recovery scores, time to discharge, and adverse events were recorded prospectively. Data were analyzed using two independent sample t-test and paired t-test, with p < 0.05 taken as statistically significant. Results The mean difference of overall NRS (numerical rating scale) pain scores in the ward was significantly higher in the IVL group as compared to the TEA group, which was 3.58 (2.29) vs 2.23 1.95) (p < 0.001). The IVL group required more mean rescue opioid boluses than the TEA group, which was 11.36 (8.684) vs 5.96 (6.215) (p < 0.001). However, both IVL and TEA groups had similar pain scores intraoperatively and in the PACU. Conclusions TEA provides better analgesia and decreased opioid requirements compared to intravenous lidocaine during the 24-hour period in the ward after laparoscopic left-sided colon and sphincter-sparing rectal surgery, although there was no difference in the quality of recovery between IVL and TEA groups.

Lung-Protective Effects of Lidocaine Infusion on Patients with Intermediate/ High Risk of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

The non-local anesthetic effects of lidocaine have been widely reported, but there are still few studies on lung protection. We aimed to test the hypothesis that intravenous infusion of lidocaine exerts lung-protective effects in patients at intermediate/high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) on major abdominal surgery.

Patients and Methods

Patients ≥18 years, ASA II or III, with intermediate/high risk for PPCs, were included. Patients were randomly assigned into group lidocaine (received a bolus of lidocaine 1.5 mg kg⁻¹ before the induction of anesthesia, then followed by a continuous infusion of 2.0 mg kg⁻¹ h⁻¹ intraoperatively until the end of surgery) or group control (received 0.9% saline in place of lidocaine at the same time points). The incidence of PPCs within 7 postoperative days was measured, defined as a collapsed composite outcome of atelectasis, respiratory infection, pleural effusion, pneumonia, respiratory failure or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) developed within 7 postoperative days, or hospital discharge, whichever came sooner.

Results

Of 200 subjects screened, 195 patients were finally analyzed. Overall, 35.9% (70/195) patients sustained PPCs, which occurred fewer in group lidocaine 25.8% (25/97), compared with group control 45.9% (45/98) (relative risk: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.84; absolute risk reduction: −20.1%; P = 0.003). Considering single PPCs episode, the most common PPC in both groups was atelectasis. The atelectasis incidence was 11.3% (11/97) in group lidocaine, much lower than that in group control 29.6% (29/98) (relative risk: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.72; absolute risk reduction: −18.3%, P = 0.002). However, the incidences of any other PPCs episodes were similar between the two groups.

Conclusion

Intraoperative intravenous infusion lidocaine could decrease the incidence of PPCs in patients at intermediate/high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications undergoing major abdominal surgery.

The effects of target-controlled infusion of lidocaine undergoing vocal cord polypectomy: A randomized controlled trial (CONSORT compliant)

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of general anesthesia-assisted target-controlled plasma infusion of lidocaine in patients with vocal cord polypectomy using a supporting laryngoscope.

METHODS

In total, 80 patients undergoing vocal cord polypectomy using a supporting laryngoscope were randomly divided into an intervention group and a control group; each group contained 40 subjects: both groups received general anesthesia; subjects in the intervention also received an additional 3 mg/L of lidocaine by target-controlled plasma infusion during induction and maintenance of anesthesia; heart rate (HR) mean arterial pressure (MAP), propofol and urapidil consumption (Uradil, which is a blood pressure drug that blocks alpha-1, is called Urapidi Hydrochloride Injection. It is produced by Germany, the enterprise name is Nycomed Deutschland GmbH, the import drug registration number is H20090715, and it is widely used in China), recovery time, and cough score (measured by Minogue et al's 5-grade scoring method) during extubation, and throat pain score (measured by visual analogue scale,[VAS]) after extubation and adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

Significant differences were observed in HR (P < .05) and MAP (P < .05) immediately after intubation (T2), immediately after the operation starting to support laryngoscope exposure (T3), immediately after operation field adrenergic tampon hemostasis (T4), and 5 minutes after hemostasis (T5) between the 2 groups, and significant differences were also observed in HR (P < .05) before intubation (T1). Moreover, significant differences were observed in propofol consumption (P < .05), urapidil consumption (P < .05), cough score during extubation (P < .05), and throat pain score after extubation (P < .05). However, no significant difference was observed in the recovery time (P > .05). Furthermore, no adverse events were detected in either group.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that target-controlled plasma infusion of lidocaine can reduce propofol consumption in patients undergoing vocal cord polypectomy by supporting laryngoscopy, and the hemodynamics are more stable and reduce the coughing reaction in the wake period and throat pain after extubation without adverse events.

Preventing Pediatric Chronic Postsurgical Pain: Time for Increased Rigor

Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) results from a cascade of events in the peripheral and central nervous systems following surgery. Several clinical predictors, including the prior pain state, premorbid psychological state (e.g., anxiety, catastrophizing), intraoperative surgical load (establishment of peripheral and central sensitization), and acute postoperative pain management, may contribute to the patient’s risk of developing CPSP. However, research on the neurobiological and biobehavioral mechanisms contributing to pediatric CPSP and effective preemptive/treatment strategies are still lacking. Here we evaluate the perisurgical process by identifying key problems and propose potential solutions for the pre-, intra-, and postoperative pain states to both prevent and manage the transition of acute to chronic pain. We propose an eight-step process involving preemptive and preventative analgesia, behavioral interventions, and the use of biomarkers (brain-based, inflammatory, or genetic) to facilitate timely evaluation and treatment of premorbid psychological factors, ongoing surgical pain, and postoperative pain to provide an overall improved outcome. By achieving this, we can begin to establish personalized precision medicine for children and adolescents presenting to surgery and subsequent treatment selection.

Intravenous Infusion of Lidocaine for Bowel Function Recovery After Major Colorectal Surgery: A Critical Appraisal Through Updated Meta-Analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis, Certainty of Evidence, and Meta-Regression

Background

Intravenous infusion of lidocaine (IVF-Lido) during the perioperative period is an option to accelerate bowel function recovery after major colorectal surgery. However, previous meta-analyses have shown inconsistent conclusions. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported after the publication of a previous meta-analysis.

Aim

We conducted an updated and comprehensive meta-analysis to determine the effects of IVF-Lido on time to first flatus and defecation after major colorectal surgery.

Methods

We performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2020 guideline. Only RCTs were included. The revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was chosen for appraisal. Meta-analysis with meta-regression and trial sequential analysis was carried out. The Doi plot was presented to evaluate publication bias. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology was executed to evaluate the certainty of evidence (CoE).

Results

Thirteen RCTs with 696 participants were enrolled. IVF-Lido significantly decreased the time to first flatus [mean difference (MD) = −6.03 h; 95% confidence interval (CI): (−8.80, −3.26)] and first defecation [MD = −10.49 h; 95% CI: (−15.58, −5.41)]. Trial sequential analysis yielded identical results and ampleness of required information sizes. No obviousness in publication bias was detected, and the CoE in GRADE was low in both outcomes. Meta-regression showed that a significantly shorter time to the first defecation was associated with studies with more improvement in pain control in comparison of two groups and better-improved analgesia in the control group.

Conclusions

We discretionarily suggest the use of IVF-Lido on postoperative bowel function recovery following major colorectal surgery. Beyond the analgesic effects, IVF-Lido might have additional benefits when postoperative pain relief has already been achieved. Considering the high heterogeneity in this updated meta-analysis, more RCTs are needed.

Systematic Review Registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2020-7-0023/, INPLASY [202070023].

Effects of Systemic Lidocaine on Postoperative Recovery Quality and Immune Function in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Radical Gastrectomy

Objective

This study aimed to explore the effects of lidocaine on postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) and immune function in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy.

Methods

In total, 135 patients were enrolled and were equally randomized to receive low-dose lidocaine (Group LL: 1.5 mg/kg bolus followed by an infusion at 1.0 mg/kg/hour) or high-dose lidocaine (Group HL: 1.5 mg/kg bolus followed by an infusion at 2.0 mg/kg/hour) or Controls (Group C: received a volume-matched normal saline at the same rate). The primary outcome was a QoR-40 score on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes were a QoR-40 score on POD 3, levels of inflammatory factors (IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α) and CD4⁺T cells, CD8⁺T cells proportions, and CD4⁺/CD8⁺ cell ratios and postoperative recovery of bowel function.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in patient characteristics at baseline. The total QoR-40 scores on POD 1 in Group HL (171.4±3.89) were higher than those in Group LL (166.20±4.05) and in Group C (163.40±4.38) (adjusted P<0.001). Differences in the dimension scores of QoR-40 for pain, physical comfort, and emotional state were significant across the three groups. Lidocaine administration significantly reduced the release of IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, and attenuated immune changes induced by trauma. Kaplan–Meier curves showed that the median time to the first exhaust and defecation were shorter in the Group HL than in Groups LL and C (1.55 days vs 2.4 days vs 2.6 days, log rank P<0.0001; and 2.86 days vs 3.22 days vs 3.46 days, log rank P=0.002, respectively). Additionally, patients in lidocaine groups required less remifentanil consumption and experienced lower pain intensity, compared with the control group.

Conclusion

Systemic lidocaine improved postoperative recovery, alleviated inflammation and immunosuppression, and accelerated the return of bowel function, and is thus, worthy of clinical application.

Clinical Trials Registration

ChiCTR2000028934.

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

Purpose

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

Patients and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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

Background

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Intravenous Infusion of Lidocaine Can Accelerate Postoperative Early Recovery in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is defined by intermittent and recurrent episodes of partial or complete obstruction of the upper airway during sleep. Intermittent and recurrent hypoxia/reoxygenation is the main pathophysiological mechanism of OSA. Its consequences include systemic inflammation, activation of the sympathetic nervous system, and release of oxygen free radicals. Infusion of intravenous (IV) lidocaine has anti-inflammatory, antihyperalgesic, and analgesic properties, supporting its use as an anesthetic adjuvant. Lidocaine can reduce nociception and/or cardiovascular responses to surgical stress, as well as postoperative pain and/or analgesic requirements. Because of the high prevalence of OSA in obese patients, the use of opioids to manage postoperative pain in that population is often accompanied by the development of adverse respiratory events, such as hypoventilation and hypoxemia. IV infusion of lidocaine has been shown to enhance the quality of early recovery after laparoscopic bariatric and upper airway surgery. However, limited evidence exists regarding its use in patients undergoing surgery for OSA. In addition, whether IV infusion of lidocaine can improve postoperative early recovery in patients undergoing surgery for OSA remains unknown. Therefore, we hypothesized that IV infusion of lidocaine can improve postoperative early recovery in patients undergoing surgery for OSA. Perioperative infusion also may be a promising analgesic adjunct to enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols.

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.

Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion on Postoperative Early Recovery Quality in Upper Airway Surgery

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Systemic infusions of lidocaine have been widely used as perioperative analgesic adjuvants. The aim of this randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial was to investigate the effect of perioperative lidocaine infusion on postoperative early recovery quality in upper airway surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial.

METHODS

A total of 99 patients were randomly assigned to the lidocaine group (group L) or the control group (group C). The patients received 2 mg/kg lidocaine completed within 10 minutes before the induction of anesthesia followed by continuous infusions of 2 mg/kg/hr lidocaine (group L) or the same volume of 0.9% normal saline (group C) intravenously during anesthesia. The Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) survey was administered on the preoperative day (Pre) and postoperative days 1 (POD1) and 2 (POD2). The primary endpoint was QoR-40 score on POD1 and POD2.

RESULTS

Compared with Pre, global QoR-40 scores on POD1 and POD2 were significantly lower (P < .05). Compared with group C, global QoR-40 scores were significantly higher in group L on POD1 and POD2 (P < .05). Among the five dimensions of QoR-40, the scores for physical comfort, emotional state, and pain were superior in group L compared to group C (P < .05). Compared with group C, the consumption of remifentanil and diclofenac as well as the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postoperative 48-hour numeric rating scale (NRS) scores in group L were significantly lower (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic lidocaine infusion can improve QoR-40 scores in patients with upper airway surgery, reduce the dosage of intraoperative opioids, decrease the incidence of PONV and NRS scores 2 days after surgery, thus improving postoperative early recovery quality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b Laryngoscope, 131:E63-E69, 2021.

Intravenous Lidocaine for Chronic Neuropathic Pain A Systematic Review Addressing Nursing Care

BACKGROUND

The intravenous administration of lidocaine for patients with chronic neuropathic pain is well documented in the literature. However, little is known about the role of the nurse caring for patients receiving the infusion.

AIM

The purpose of this systematic review was to examine and describe common side effects associated with the intravenous administration of lidocaine to patients with chronic neuropathic pain and outline nursing care described in an effort to develop evidence-based protocols for care.

METHOD

A comprehensive search of databases was completed and yielded eleven (n = 11) articles and one care protocol for analysis.

RESULTS

Evidence was appraised and findings suggest intravenous lidocaine has a low risk of causing adverse events, however patients should be monitored closely.

CONCLUSIONS

Nursing care focuses on pain assessment, close observation and intervention if neurological changes occur.

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.