BACKGROUND: We compared the effects of intravenous lidocaine (IVL) with lumbar epidural lidocaine analgesia (LEA) on pain and ileusafter open colonic surgery. METHODS:Between December 2011 and February 2013, 60 patients were randomly allocated to IVL, LEA, or control group. The IVL group received intraoperatively lidocaine 2 % intravenously (1.5 mg/kg bolus, 2 mg/kg/h infusion) and normal saline (NS) epidurally. The LEA group received lidocaine epidurally (1.5 mg/kg bolus, 2 mg/kg/h infusion) and NS intravenously. The control group received NS both intravenously and epidurally, as bolus and infusion. All NS volumes were calculated as if containing lidocaine 2 % at the aforementioned doses. We assessed pain intensity at rest/cough at 1, 2, 4, 12, 24, and 48 h postoperatively (numerical rating scale 0-10), 48-h analgesic consumption, and time to first flatus passage. RESULTS: Data from 60 patients (20 per group) were analyzed. The IVL group had significantly lower pain scores at rest and cough compared to LEA or control group only at 1, 2, and 4 h postoperatively (P < 0.005 for all comparisons). The 48-h analgesic requirements and time to first flatus passage did not differ significantly between IVL group and LEA or control group (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with LEA-lidocaine or placebo, intravenous lidocaine offered no clinically significant benefit in terms of analgesia and bowel function.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: We compared the effects of intravenous lidocaine (IVL) with lumbar epidural lidocaineanalgesia (LEA) on pain and ileus after open colonic surgery. METHODS: Between December 2011 and February 2013, 60 patients were randomly allocated to IVL, LEA, or control group. The IVL group received intraoperatively lidocaine 2 % intravenously (1.5 mg/kg bolus, 2 mg/kg/h infusion) and normal saline (NS) epidurally. The LEA group received lidocaine epidurally (1.5 mg/kg bolus, 2 mg/kg/h infusion) and NS intravenously. The control group received NS both intravenously and epidurally, as bolus and infusion. All NS volumes were calculated as if containing lidocaine 2 % at the aforementioned doses. We assessed pain intensity at rest/cough at 1, 2, 4, 12, 24, and 48 h postoperatively (numerical rating scale 0-10), 48-h analgesic consumption, and time to first flatus passage. RESULTS: Data from 60 patients (20 per group) were analyzed. The IVL group had significantly lower pain scores at rest and cough compared to LEA or control group only at 1, 2, and 4 h postoperatively (P < 0.005 for all comparisons). The 48-h analgesic requirements and time to first flatus passage did not differ significantly between IVL group and LEA or control group (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with LEA-lidocaine or placebo, intravenous lidocaine offered no clinically significant benefit in terms of analgesia and bowel function.
Authors: Louise Vigneault; Alexis F Turgeon; Dany Côté; François Lauzier; Ryan Zarychanski; Lynne Moore; Lauralyn A McIntyre; Pierre C Nicole; Dean A Fergusson Journal: Can J Anaesth Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 5.063
Authors: Robert Chu; Nelly Umukoro; Tiashi Greer; Jacob Roberts; Peju Adekoya; Charles A Odonkor; Jonathan M Hagedorn; Dare Olatoye; Ivan Urits; Mariam Salisu Orhurhu; Peter Umukoro; Omar Viswanath; Jamal Hasoon; Alan D Kaye; Vwaire Orhurhu Journal: Psychopharmacol Bull Date: 2020-10-15
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