A comparison between intravenous lidocaine and ketamine on acute and chronic pain after open nephrectomy: A prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study

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.

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.

Effect of magnesium sulfate with ketamine infusions on intraoperative and postoperative analgesia in cancer breast surgeries: a randomized double-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Opioids are the cornerstone in managing postoperative pain; however, they have many side effects. Ketamine and Magnesium (Mg) are NMDA receptor antagonists used as adjuvant analgesics to decrease postoperative opioid consumption.

OBJECTIVE

We assumed that adding Mg to ketamine infusion can improve the intraoperative and postoperative analgesic efficacy of ketamine infusion alone in cancer breast surgeries.

METHODS

Ninety patients aged between 18 and 65 years and undergoing elective cancer breast surgery were included in this prospective randomized, double-blind study. Group K received ketamine 0.5.ßmg.kg^...1 bolus then 0.12.ßmg.kg^...1.h^...1 infusion for the first 24.ßhours postoperatively. Group KM: received ketamine 0.5.ßmg.kg^...1 and Mg sulfate 50.ßmg.kg^...1, then ketamine 0.12.ßmg.kg^...1.h^...1 and Mg sulfate 8.ßmg.kg^...1.h^...1 infusions for the first 24.ßhours postoperative. The primary outcome was the morphine consumption in the first 24.ßhours postoperative, while the secondary outcomes were: intraoperative fentanyl consumption, NRS, side effects, and chronic postoperative pain.

RESULTS

Group KM had less postoperative opioid consumption (14.12.ß...ß5.11.ßmg) than Group K (19.43.ß...ß6.8.ßmg). Also, Group KM had less intraoperative fentanyl consumption. Both groups were similar in postoperative NRS scores, the incidence of side effects related to opioids, and chronic neuropathic pain.

CONCLUSION

Adding Mg to ketamine infusion can safely improve intraoperative and postoperative analgesia with opioid-sparing effect in cancer breast surgery.

A Comparison Between the Effectiveness of Ketamine Bolus and Intradermal Lidocaine in Reducing Acute Postoperative Pain

Background and objective

In light of the scarcity of data and research about the management of pain in a low-resource setting, we conducted this study with a view to assessing the effectiveness of intravenous ketamine in comparison to that of intradermal lidocaine in reducing postoperative pain. Postoperative pain can lead to significant morbidity, longer hospital stay, and the development of chronic pain. Our study was formulated to assess the effectiveness of a ketamine bolus in comparison to intradermal lidocaine at the wound site in terms of decreasing pain scores postoperatively.

Methods

In our study, 99 patients were randomly selected to undergo inguinal hernia repair under spinal anesthesia. After obtaining informed consent from the participants and approval from the hospital ethical committee, the patients were randomly classified into the following three groups: the lidocaine group (group A), the ketamine group (group B), and the control group (group C). The patients in the lidocaine group received 0.6 mL/kg of 0.25% lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg) infiltration at the wound site. The ketamine group was given a 50-mg ketamine bolus at the end of the operation, and the control group did not receive either ketamine or intradermal lidocaine at the wound site. Postoperative pain was recorded using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scoring and the results were compared. The time of the first request for analgesia was also recorded.

Results

The pain scores measured via VAS scores were higher in patients who received intradermal lidocaine (group A) at the wound site as compared to group B that received a bolus of 50-mg ketamine (p<0.0001); the control group (group C) had pain scores higher than both groups A and B (p=0.0001).

Conclusion

Based on our findings, administering ketamine bolus can significantly decrease VAS scores and reduce the incidence of chronic post-surgical pain as compared to lidocaine infiltration. Ketamine, an N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, provides excellent pain relief and analgesia, which decreases overall pain scores.

Comparing the effect of electronic and lecture education of pain management on the knowledge, attitude, and practice of nurses: A randomized-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Efficient pain management by nursing staff initially needs accurate knowledge and proper attitude in this field. The aim of present study was to compare the effects of lecture and electronic education on the knowledge, attitude, and practice of nursing staff regarding pain management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present superiority randomized controlled trial with two parallel arms was conducted on 78 occupied nurses of surgery wards of X. The participants were recruited randomly and divided into two groups of lecture and electronic education through random blocking (4 and 6 blocks). For allocation concealment, coded nontransparent pockets numbered 1-78 containing the type of intervention were used. Educational material was presented using teacher-centered method in lecture group, as well as through multimedia program using FLASH software in e-learning group through 1-h sessions for 4 weeks. Data on nurses were collected before and 4 weeks after the training using demographic questionnaire, Pain Management Principles Assessment Tool, Nurses' Attitude Survey, and nursing practice checklist. Data were analyzed using SPSS software (version 24) utilizing descriptive and analytic statistical test such as Chi-square, Fisher, independent t-test, and ANCOVA. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Mean ± standard deviation of nurses' knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding pain management had significant increase in both groups post-training (P < 0.001). According to ANCOVA the mean postintervention knowledge score in e-learning group by controlling baseline score had significant increase compared to the lecture group (adjusted mean difference [aMD] = 1.8: 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5-2.1, P < 0.001). Furthermore, the mean of total scores of post-intervention attitude and practice in e-learning group adjusted for baseline score significantly increased compared to lecture group (aMD = 1.8: 95% CI = 1.5-2.1, P < 0.001) and (aMD = 3.2: 95% CI = 2.7-3.6, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Electronic education was more efficient than lecture education in increasing of knowledge, attitude, and practice on pain management among nursing staff.

Pharmacotherapy for the Prevention of Chronic Pain after Surgery in Adults: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic postsurgical pain can severely impair patient health and quality of life. This systematic review update evaluated the effectiveness of systemic drugs to prevent chronic postsurgical pain.

METHODS

The authors included double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled trials including adults that evaluated perioperative systemic drugs. Studies that evaluated same drug(s) administered similarly were pooled. The primary outcome was the proportion reporting any pain at 3 or more months postsurgery.

RESULTS

The authors identified 70 new studies and 40 from 2013. Most evaluated ketamine, pregabalin, gabapentin, IV lidocaine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and corticosteroids. Some meta-analyses showed statistically significant-but of unclear clinical relevance-reductions in chronic postsurgical pain prevalence after treatment with pregabalin, IV lidocaine, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Meta-analyses with more than three studies and more than 500 participants showed no effect of ketamine on prevalence of any pain at 6 months when administered for 24 h or less (risk ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.36 to 1.07]; prevalence, 0 to 88% ketamine; 0 to 94% placebo) or more than 24 h (risk ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.74 to 1.12]; 6 to 71% ketamine; 5 to 78% placebo), no effect of pregabalin on prevalence of any pain at 3 months (risk ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.70 to 1.10]; 4 to 88% pregabalin; 3 to 80% placebo) or 6 months (risk ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.47 to 1.28]; 6 to 68% pregabalin; 4 to 69% placebo) when administered more than 24 h, and an effect of pregabalin on prevalence of moderate/severe pain at 3 months when administered more than 24 h (risk ratio, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.68]; 0 to 20% pregabalin; 4 to 34% placebo). However, the results should be interpreted with caution given small study sizes, variable surgical types, dosages, timing and method of outcome measurements in relation to the acute pain trajectory in question, and preoperative pain status.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite agreement that chronic postsurgical pain is an important topic, extremely little progress has been made since 2013, likely due to study designs being insufficient to address the complexities of this multifactorial problem.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

A pilot multicentre randomised controlled trial of lidocaine infusion in women undergoing breast cancer surgery

Chronic postoperative pain is common after breast cancer surgery. Peri-operative lidocaine infusion may prevent the development of chronic postoperative pain, but a large-scale trial is required to test this hypothesis. It is unclear whether a pragmatic, multicentre trial design that is consistent with expert guidance, addresses the limitations of previous studies, and overcomes existing translational barriers is safe, effective and feasible. We conducted a double-blind, randomised controlled pilot study in 150 patients undergoing breast cancer surgery across three hospitals in Western Australia. Patients received lidocaine, or equivalent volumes of saline, as an intravenous bolus (1.5 mg.kg^-1 ) and infusion (2 mg.kg^-1 .h^-1 ) intra-operatively, and a subcutaneous infusion (1.33 mg.kg^-1 .h^-1 ) postoperatively for up to 12 h on a standard surgical ward, with novel safety monitoring tools in place. The co-primary outcomes were: in-hospital safety events; serum levels of lidocaine during intravenous and subcutaneous infusion; and annualised enrolment rates per site with long-term data capture. In-hospital safety events were rare, and similar in the placebo and lidocaine arms (3% vs. 1%). Median (IQR [range]) serum lidocaine levels during intravenous (2.16 (1.74-2.83 [1.12-6.06]) µg.ml^-1 , n = 41) and subcutaneous (1.52 (1.28-1.83 [0.64-2.85]) µg.ml^-1 , n = 48) infusion were comparable with previous trials reporting improved pain outcomes. Annualised enrolment approximated 50 patients per site per year, with high levels of protocol adherence and ≥ 99% capture of outcomes at 3 and 6 months. The adjusted odds ratio (95%CI) for postoperative pain at 6 months in the lidocaine arm was 0.790 (0.370-1.684). We conclude that this trial, as designed, is safe, effective and feasible in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery, and a larger-scale trial is planned.

Ketamine Use in the Surgical Patient: a Literature Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

While ketamine is an established anesthetic, its role in the management of acute surgical pain is less certain. Therefore, a literature review is warranted to examine the role of ketamine in acute pain management.

RECENT FINDINGS

The use of ketamine appears to be most efficacious in larger procedures that lead to increased systemic inflammation or extensive tissue damage. In addition, ketamine seems to be most successful when administered consistently throughout a procedure, such as by an infusion instead of a single bolus, in order to have adequate dosing for an analgesic effect. Therefore, the focus of research should be on procedures that lead to moderate to severe pain using frequent dosing to determine the most effective role of ketamine. Most importantly, the current literature shows that ketamine can be used as a successful part of multimodal anesthesia with few side effects in patients undergoing major procedures associated with moderate to severe pain.

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.

Neuroanesthesia Guidelines for Optimizing Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Neuromonitoring During Deformity and Complex Spinal Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Study

STUDY DESIGN

Expert opinion-modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE

We used a modified Delphi approach to obtain consensus among leading spinal deformity surgeons and their neuroanesthesiology teams regarding optimal practices for obtaining reliable motor evoked potential (MEP) signals.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of transcranial MEPs provides the best method for assessing spinal cord integrity during complex spinal surgeries. MEPs are affected by pharmacological and physiological parameters. It is the responsibility of the spine surgeon and neuroanesthesia team to understand how they can best maintain high-quality MEP signals throughout surgery. Nevertheless, varying approaches to neuroanesthesia are seen in clinical practice.

METHODS

We identified 19 international expert spinal deformity treatment teams. A modified Delphi process with two rounds of surveying was performed. Greater than 50% agreement on the final statements was considered "agreement"; >75% agreement was considered "consensus."

RESULTS

Anesthesia regimens and protocols were obtained from the expert centers. There was a large amount of variability among centers. Two rounds of consensus surveying were performed, and all centers participated in both rounds of surveying. Consensus was obtained for 12 of 15 statements, and majority agreement was obtained for two of the remaining statements. Total intravenous anesthesia was identified as the preferred method of maintenance, with few centers allowing for low mean alveolar concentration of inhaled anesthetic. Most centers advocated for <150 μg/kg/min of propofol with titration to the lowest dose that maintains appropriate anesthesia depth based on awareness monitoring. Use of adjuvant intravenous anesthetics, including ketamine, low-dose dexmedetomidine, and lidocaine, may help to reduce propofol requirements without negatively effecting MEP signals.

CONCLUSION

Spine surgeons and neuroanesthesia teams should be familiar with methods for optimizing MEPs during deformity and complex spinal cases. Although variability in practices exists, there is consensus among international spinal deformity treatment centers regarding best practices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.

Lidocaine as an element of multimodal analgesic therapy in major spine surgical procedures in children: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study

Background

Introducing the principles of multimodal analgesic therapy is necessary to provide appropriate comfort for the patient after surgery. The main objective of the study was evaluating the influence of perioperative intravenous (i.v.) lidocaine infusion on postoperative morphine requirements during the first 48 h postoperatively in children undergoing major spine surgery.

Materials and methods

Prospective, randomized, double-blind study: 41 children, qualified to multilevel spine surgery, were randomly divided into two treatment groups: lidocaine and placebo (control). The lidocaine group received lidocaine as a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg over 30 minutes, followed by a continuous infusion at 1 mg/kg/h to 6 hours after surgery. The protocol of perioperative management was identical for all patients. Measurements: morphine demand, intensity of postoperative pain (the Numerical Rating Scale), oral feeding initiation time, first attempts at assuming erect position, postoperative quality of life (the Acute Short-form /SF-12/ health survey).

Results

Patient data did not differ demographically. Compared to the control group, lidocaine treatment reduced the demand for morphine during the first 24h [95% CI 0.13 (0.11-0.28) mg/kg, p = 0.0122], 48h [95% CI 0.46 (0.22-0.52) mg/kg, p = 0.0299] after surgery and entire hospitalization [95% CI 0.58 (0.19-0.78) mg/kg, p = 0.04]; postoperative pain intensity; nutritional withdrawal period [introduction of liquid diet (p = 0.024) and solid diet (p = 0.012)], and accelerated the adoption of an upright position [sitting (p = 0.048); walking (p = 0.049)]. The SF-12 generic health survey did not differ between groups before operation, 2 months and 4 years after surgery.

Conclusions

Perioperative lidocaine administration, as a part of the applied analgesic therapy regimen, may decrease postoperative opioid demand and accelerates convalescence of children undergoing major surgery.

Effect of ketamine combined with lidocaine in pediatric anesthesia

Background

We conducted a randomized clinical trial to determine whether adjunctive lidocaine diminishes the incidence of adverse effects in pediatric patients sedated with ketamine.

Methods

This case‐control study involved 586 consecutive pediatric patients necessitating anesthesia. Then systolic blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, and blood oxygen saturation were observed. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), urea nitrogen (BUN), and creatinine (Cr) levels were tested. General dose of ketamine, the time of onset and duration of anesthesia and postoperative recovery, anesthesia effect, and adverse reaction were subsequently compared. High‐performance liquid chromatography was employed to detect ketamine concentration at different time points after administration, and the postoperative cognition function was further evaluated.

Results

Intra‐ and post‐operation, the rising degree of ALT, AST, BUN, and Cr in patients treated with ketamine was higher than those in patients treated with the ketamine‐lidocaine complex. General dose of ketamine, the time of onset and duration of anesthesia, postoperative recovery time, and the incidence rate of adverse reaction in patients treated with ketamine‐lidocaine complex were lower, but the concentration of ketamine was higher compared to the patients treated with ketamine. In patients treated with the ketamine‐lidocaine complex, elimination half‐life of ketamine was prolonged, the area under curve was increased, and the plasma clearance rate was decreased relative to those with ketamine alone.

Conclusions

Ketamine combined with lidocaine may be beneficial in shortening the onset of anesthesia, promoting postoperative awake, prolonging elimination half‐life, increasing area under curve, and decreasing plasma clearance rate and incidence of adverse reactions.

Adult Cancer Pain, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

In recent years, the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Adult Cancer Pain have undergone substantial revisions focusing on the appropriate and safe prescription of opioid analgesics, optimization of nonopioid analgesics and adjuvant medications, and integration of nonpharmacologic methods of cancer pain management. This selection highlights some of these changes, covering topics on management of adult cancer pain including pharmacologic interventions, nonpharmacologic interventions, and treatment of specific cancer pain syndromes. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Adult Cancer Pain addresses additional aspects of this topic, including pathophysiologic classification of cancer pain syndromes, comprehensive pain assessment, management of pain crisis, ongoing care for cancer pain, pain in cancer survivors, and specialty consultations.

Efficacy of intravenous lidocaine in improving post-operative nausea, vomiting and early recovery after laparoscopic gynaecological surgery

Post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a major peri-operative complication. It has numerous adverse consequences that seriously affect the post-operative recovery of patients. The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine in improving PONV and recovery after laparoscopic gynaecological surgery. A total of 40 patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups: Group L (lidocaine group) and Group C (control group). The patients in Group L received intravenous lidocaine throughout the operation, while patients in Group C were given a saline infusion. Vital signs, recovery time, extubation time, dosage of remifentanil, first flatus time and defecation time of each patient were recorded. The incidence of PONV after surgery was also recorded. The recovery of the patients was evaluated by using the quality of recovery score (QoR-40). The total dose of remifentanil was significantly lower in Group L (P<0.05). However, the recovery time and extubation time were shorter in Group C (P<0.05). The first flatus time and defecation time were longer in Group C (P<0.05). The mean arterial pressure and heart rate in Group L were lower and more stable (P<0.05). At 6 h after surgery, the incidence of PONV was significantly lower in Group L vs. that in Group C (P<0.05). The QoR-40 score in Group C was significantly lower at 1 and 3 days after the operation compared with that in Group C (P<0.05). In conclusion, intravenous lidocaine administered to patients undergoing laparoscopic gynaecological surgery may reduce PONV and supports their early recovery [trial registration number in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-IOR-17010782 (March 5, 2017)].

Chronified Pain Following Operative Procedures

BACKGROUND

Over 18 million operative procedures are performed each year in Germany alone. Approximately 10% of surgical patients develop moderate to severe chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP), which can severely impair their quality of life. The pain must persist for at least three months to be called chronic; pain that arises after a symptom-free interval is not excluded. The perioperative use of local anesthetic agents may lessen the incidence of CPSP.

METHODS

We selectively reviewed the pertinent literature, including two current Cochrane Reviews. Local and regional anesthetic techniques are discussed, as is the intravenous administration of lidocaine.

RESULTS

The main risk factors for CPSP are pre-existing (preoperative) chronic pain, opioid intake, a pain-related catastrophizing tendency, intraoperative nerve injury, and severe acute postoperative pain. CPSP is reported to be especially common after thoracic surgery, breast surgery, amputations, and orthopedic procedures. Local and regional anesthetic techniques have been shown to significantly lower the incidence of CPSP after thoracotomy (number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome [NNTB] = 7), breast cancer surgery (NNTB = 7), and cesarean section (NNTB = 19). Intravenous lidocaine also lowers the incidence of CPSP after various types of procedures.

CONCLUSION

Local and regional anesthetic techniques and intravenous lidocaine lower the incidence of CPSP after certain types of operative procedures. The intravenous administration of lidocaine to prevent CPSP is off label and requires the patient's informed consent. The evidence for the measures presented here is of low to medium quality.

Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Postsurgical Pain: A Narrative Review

Chronic postsurgical pain affects between 5 and 75% of patients, often with an adverse impact on quality of life. While the transition of acute to chronic pain is a complex process-involving multiple mechanisms at different levels-the current strategies for prevention have primarily been restricted to perioperative pharmacological interventions. In the present paper, we first present an up-to-date narrative literature review of these interventions. In the second section, we develop several ways by which we could overcome the limitations of the current approaches and enhance the outcome of our surgical patients, including the better identification of individual risk factors, tailoring treatment to individual patients, and improved acute and subacute pain evaluation and management. The third and final section covers the treatment of established CPSP. Given that evidence for the current therapeutic options is limited, we need high-quality trials studying multimodal interventions matched to pain characteristics.

Perioperative intravenous ketamine for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Inadequate pain management after surgery increases the risk of postoperative complications and may predispose for chronic postsurgical pain. Perioperative ketamine may enhance conventional analgesics in the acute postoperative setting.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of perioperative intravenous ketamine in adult patients when used for the treatment or prevention of acute pain following general anaesthesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to July 2018 and three trials registers (metaRegister of controlled trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP)) together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought randomised, double-blind, controlled trials of adults undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia and being treated with perioperative intravenous ketamine. Studies compared ketamine with placebo, or compared ketamine plus a basic analgesic, such as morphine or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), with a basic analgesic alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors searched for studies, extracted efficacy and adverse event data, examined issues of study quality and potential bias, and performed analyses. Primary outcomes were opioid consumption and pain intensity at rest and during movement at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were time to first analgesic request, assessment of postoperative hyperalgesia, central nervous system (CNS) adverse effects, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 130 studies with 8341 participants. Ketamine was given to 4588 participants and 3753 participants served as controls. Types of surgery included ear, nose or throat surgery, wisdom tooth extraction, thoracotomy, lumbar fusion surgery, microdiscectomy, hip joint replacement surgery, knee joint replacement surgery, anterior cruciate ligament repair, knee arthroscopy, mastectomy, haemorrhoidectomy, abdominal surgery, radical prostatectomy, thyroid surgery, elective caesarean section, and laparoscopic surgery. Racemic ketamine bolus doses were predominantly 0.25 mg to 1 mg, and infusions 2 to 5 µg/kg/minute; 10 studies used only S-ketamine and one only R-ketamine. Risk of bias was generally low or uncertain, except for study size; most had fewer than 50 participants per treatment arm, resulting in high heterogeneity, as expected, for most analyses. We did not stratify the main analysis by type of surgery or any other factor, such as dose or timing of ketamine administration, and used a non-stratified analysis.Perioperative intravenous ketamine reduced postoperative opioid consumption over 24 hours by 8 mg morphine equivalents (95% CI 6 to 9; 19% from 42 mg consumed by participants given placebo, moderate-quality evidence; 65 studies, 4004 participants). Over 48 hours, opioid consumption was 13 mg lower (95% CI 10 to 15; 19% from 67 mg with placebo, moderate-quality evidence; 37 studies, 2449 participants).Perioperative intravenous ketamine reduced pain at rest at 24 hours by 5/100 mm on a visual analogue scale (95% CI 4 to 7; 19% lower from 26/100 mm with placebo, high-quality evidence; 82 studies, 5004 participants), and at 48 hours by 5/100 mm (95% CI 3 to 7; 22% lower from 23/100 mm, high-quality evidence; 49 studies, 2962 participants). Pain during movement was reduced at 24 hours (6/100 mm, 14% lower from 42/100 mm, moderate-quality evidence; 29 studies, 1806 participants), and 48 hours (6/100 mm, 16% lower from 37 mm, low-quality evidence; 23 studies, 1353 participants).Results for primary outcomes were consistent when analysed by pain at rest or on movement, operation type, and timing of administration, or sensitivity to study size and pain intensity. No analysis by dose was possible. There was no difference when nitrous oxide was used. We downgraded the quality of the evidence once if numbers of participants were large but small-study effects were present, or twice if numbers were small and small-study effects likely but testing not possible.Ketamine increased the time for the first postoperative analgesic request by 54 minutes (95% CI 37 to 71 minutes), from a mean of 39 minutes with placebo (moderate-quality evidence; 31 studies, 1678 participants). Ketamine reduced the area of postoperative hyperalgesia by 7 cm² (95% CI -11.9 to -2.2), compared with placebo (very low-quality evidence; 7 studies 333 participants). We downgraded the quality of evidence because of small-study effects or because the number of participants was below 400.CNS adverse events occurred in 52 studies, while 53 studies reported of absence of CNS adverse events. Overall, 187/3614 (5%) participants receiving ketamine and 122/2924 (4%) receiving control treatment experienced an adverse event (RR 1.2, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.4; high-quality evidence; 105 studies, 6538 participants). Ketamine reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting from 27% with placebo to 23% with ketamine (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.96; the number needed to treat to prevent one episode of postoperative nausea and vomiting with perioperative intravenous ketamine administration was 24 (95% CI 16 to 54; high-quality evidence; 95 studies, 5965 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative intravenous ketamine probably reduces postoperative analgesic consumption and pain intensity. Results were consistent in different operation types or timing of ketamine administration, with larger and smaller studies, and by higher and lower pain intensity. CNS adverse events were little different with ketamine or control. Perioperative intravenous ketamine probably reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting by a small extent, of arguable clinical relevance.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Continuous intravenous perioperative lidocaine infusion for postoperative pain and recovery in adults

BACKGROUND

The management of postoperative pain and recovery is still unsatisfactory in a number of cases in clinical practice. Opioids used for postoperative analgesia are frequently associated with adverse effects, including nausea and constipation, preventing smooth postoperative recovery. Not all patients are suitable for, and benefit from, epidural analgesia that is used to improve postoperative recovery. The non-opioid, lidocaine, was investigated in several studies for its use in multimodal management strategies to reduce postoperative pain and enhance recovery. This review was published in 2015 and updated in January 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and risks) of perioperative intravenous (IV) lidocaine infusion compared to placebo/no treatment or compared to epidural analgesia on postoperative pain and recovery in adults undergoing various surgical procedures.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and reference lists of articles in January 2017. We searched one trial registry contacted researchers in the field, and handsearched journals and congress proceedings. We updated this search in February 2018, but have not yet incorporated these results into the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used Cochrane's standard methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: pain score at rest; gastrointestinal recovery and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included: postoperative nausea and postoperative opioid consumption. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 new trials in the update. In total, the review included 68 trials (4525 randomized participants). Two trials compared IV lidocaine with TEA. In all remaining trials, placebo or no treatment was used as a comparator. Trials involved participants undergoing open abdominal (22), laparoscopic abdominal (20), or various other surgical procedures (26). The application scheme of systemic lidocaine strongly varies between the studies related to both dose (1 mg/kg/h to 5 mg/kg/h) and termination of the infusion (from the end of surgery until several days after).The risk of bias was low with respect to selection bias (random sequence generation), performance bias, attrition bias, and detection bias in more than 50% of the included studies. For allocation concealment and selective reporting, the quality assessment yielded low risk of bias for only approximately 20% of the included studies.IV Lidocaine compared to placebo or no treatment We are uncertain whether IV lidocaine improves postoperative pain compared to placebo or no treatment at early time points (1 to 4 hours) (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.72 to -0.28; 29 studies, 1656 participants; very low-quality evidence) after surgery. Due to variation in the standard deviation (SD) in the studies, this would equate to an average pain reduction of between 0.37 cm and 2.48 cm on a 0 to 10 cm visual analogue scale . Assuming approximately 1 cm on a 0 to 10 cm pain scale is clinically meaningful, we ruled out a clinically relevant reduction in pain with lidocaine at intermediate (24 hours) (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.04; 33 studies, 1847 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and at late time points (48 hours) (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.04; 24 studies, 1404 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Due to variation in the SD in the studies, this would equate to an average pain reduction of between 0.10 cm to 0.48 cm at 24 hours and 0.08 cm to 0.42 cm at 48 hours. In contrast to the original review in 2015, we did not find any significant subgroup differences for different surgical procedures.We are uncertain whether lidocaine reduces the risk of ileus (risk ratio (RR) 0.37, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.87; 4 studies, 273 participants), time to first defaecation/bowel movement (mean difference (MD) -7.92 hours, 95% CI -12.71 to -3.13; 12 studies, 684 participants), risk of postoperative nausea (overall, i.e. 0 up to 72 hours) (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91; 35 studies, 1903 participants), and opioid consumption (overall) (MD -4.52 mg morphine equivalents , 95% CI -6.25 to -2.79; 40 studies, 2201 participants); quality of evidence was very low for all these outcomes.The effect of IV lidocaine on adverse effects compared to placebo treatment is uncertain, as only a small number of studies systematically analysed the occurrence of adverse effects (very low-quality evidence).IV Lidocaine compared to TEAThe effects of IV lidocaine compared with TEA are unclear (pain at 24 hours (MD 1.51, 95% CI -0.29 to 3.32; 2 studies, 102 participants), pain at 48 hours (MD 0.98, 95% CI -1.19 to 3.16; 2 studies, 102 participants), time to first bowel movement (MD -1.66, 95% CI -10.88 to 7.56; 2 studies, 102 participants); all very low-quality evidence). The risk for ileus and for postoperative nausea (overall) is also unclear, as only one small trial assessed these outcomes (very low-quality evidence). No trial assessed the outcomes, 'pain at early time points' and 'opioid consumption (overall)'. The effect of IV lidocaine on adverse effects compared to TEA is uncertain (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether IV perioperative lidocaine, when compared to placebo or no treatment, has a beneficial impact on pain scores in the early postoperative phase, and on gastrointestinal recovery, postoperative nausea, and opioid consumption. The quality of evidence was limited due to inconsistency, imprecision, and study quality. Lidocaine probably has no clinically relevant effect on pain scores later than 24 hours. Few studies have systematically assessed the incidence of adverse effects. There is a lack of evidence about the effects of IV lidocaine compared with epidural anaesthesia in terms of the optimal dose and timing (including the duration) of the administration. We identified three ongoing studies, and 18 studies are awaiting classification; the results of the review may change when these studies are published and included in the review.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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