BACKGROUND: I.V. lidocaine reduces volatile anaesthetics requirements during surgery. We hypothesized that lidocaine would also reduce propofol requirements during i.v. anaesthesia. METHODS: A randomized controlled study of 40 patients tested the effect of i.v. lidocaine (1.5 mg kg(-1) then 2 mg kg(-1) h(-1)) on propofol requirements. Anaesthesia was maintained with remifentanil and propofol target-controlled infusions (TCI) to keep the bispectral index (BIS) around 50. Effect-site concentrations of propofol and remifentanil and BIS values were recorded before and after skin incision. Data were analysed using anova and mixed effects analysis with NONMEM. Two dose-response studies were then performed with and without surgical stimulation. Propofol TCI titrated to obtain a BIS around 50 was kept constant. Then patients were randomized into four groups: A, saline; B, 0.75 mg kg(-1) bolus then infusion 1 mg kg(-1) h(-1); C, 1.5 mg kg(-1) bolus and infusion 2 mg kg(-1) h(-1); and D, 3 mg kg(-1) bolus and infusion 4 mg kg(-1) h(-1). Lidocaine administration coincided with skin incision. BIS values and haemodynamic variables were recorded. Data were analysed using linear regression and two-way anova. RESULTS:Lidocaine decreased propofol requirements (P<0.05) only during surgery. In the absence of surgical stimulation, lidocaine did not affect BIS nor haemodynamic variables, whereas it reduced BIS increase (P=0.036) and haemodynamic response (P=0.006) secondary to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The sparing effect of lidocaine on anaesthetic requirements seems to be mediated by an anti-nociceptive action.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: I.V. lidocaine reduces volatile anaesthetics requirements during surgery. We hypothesized that lidocaine would also reduce propofol requirements during i.v. anaesthesia. METHODS: A randomized controlled study of 40 patients tested the effect of i.v. lidocaine (1.5 mg kg(-1) then 2 mg kg(-1) h(-1)) on propofol requirements. Anaesthesia was maintained with remifentanil and propofol target-controlled infusions (TCI) to keep the bispectral index (BIS) around 50. Effect-site concentrations of propofol and remifentanil and BIS values were recorded before and after skin incision. Data were analysed using anova and mixed effects analysis with NONMEM. Two dose-response studies were then performed with and without surgical stimulation. PropofolTCI titrated to obtain a BIS around 50 was kept constant. Then patients were randomized into four groups: A, saline; B, 0.75 mg kg(-1) bolus then infusion 1 mg kg(-1) h(-1); C, 1.5 mg kg(-1) bolus and infusion 2 mg kg(-1) h(-1); and D, 3 mg kg(-1) bolus and infusion 4 mg kg(-1) h(-1). Lidocaine administration coincided with skin incision. BIS values and haemodynamic variables were recorded. Data were analysed using linear regression and two-way anova. RESULTS:Lidocaine decreased propofol requirements (P<0.05) only during surgery. In the absence of surgical stimulation, lidocaine did not affect BIS nor haemodynamic variables, whereas it reduced BIS increase (P=0.036) and haemodynamic response (P=0.006) secondary to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The sparing effect of lidocaine on anaesthetic requirements seems to be mediated by an anti-nociceptive action.
Authors: Stephanie Weibel; Yvonne Jelting; Nathan L Pace; Antonia Helf; Leopold Hj Eberhart; Klaus Hahnenkamp; Markus W Hollmann; Daniel M Poepping; Alexander Schnabel; Peter Kranke Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-06-04
Authors: Ji Eun Kim; Jong Bum Choi; Bon-Nyeo Koo; Hae Won Jeong; Byung Ho Lee; So Yeon Kim Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 1.889