Ahmed A Tharwat1, Amr H Yehia1, Karim A Wahba1, Abd-Elrhman G Ali2. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ain Shams University Maternity Hospital, Cairo, Egypt. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Misr Al-Gededa Military Hospital, Cairo, Egypt.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of incisional infiltration of lidocaine and epinephrine vs. lidocaine only to reduce postcesarean section (C/S) pain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: It was a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded clinical trial that was conducted in two tertiary hospitals in Egypt and included 153 women undergoing C/S under general anesthesia. They were randomly divided into the following two groups: Group I (control group, number=78), in which the wound was infiltrated before skin closure with 20 mL of 2% lidocaine, and Group II (study group, number=75), in which the wound was infiltrated before skin closure with 20 mL of 2% lidocaine and epinephrine. The primary outcomes were the time to first analgesic (TFA) request (minutes) and the postoperative pain scores that were measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The secondary outcomes included the duration of C/S, onset of mobilization, onset of breastfeeding, duration of hospital stay, local or systemic side effects of lidocaine and epinephrine, postoperative pyrexia, and postoperative wound infection. RESULTS: The pain score determined using VAS after 1 and 2 h was significantly decreased in Group II than in Group I. However, at 4.8 and 16 h, these results were significantly reversed in Group II than in Group I. The cumulative postoperative opioid consumption was significantly less in Group II than in Group I (50 vs. 90 mg). The onset of mobilization, onset of breastfeeding, and duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter in Group II than in Group I, whereas the TFA request was significantly longer in Group II. CONCLUSION: Administering epinephrine with 2% lidocaine prolongs the anesthetic effect and reduces the opioid analgesic dose postoperatively required, thereby enhancing patient recovery.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of incisional infiltration of lidocaine and epinephrine vs. lidocaine only to reduce postcesarean section (C/S) pain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: It was a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded clinical trial that was conducted in two tertiary hospitals in Egypt and included 153 women undergoing C/S under general anesthesia. They were randomly divided into the following two groups: Group I (control group, number=78), in which the wound was infiltrated before skin closure with 20 mL of 2% lidocaine, and Group II (study group, number=75), in which the wound was infiltrated before skin closure with 20 mL of 2% lidocaine and epinephrine. The primary outcomes were the time to first analgesic (TFA) request (minutes) and the postoperative pain scores that were measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The secondary outcomes included the duration of C/S, onset of mobilization, onset of breastfeeding, duration of hospital stay, local or systemic side effects of lidocaine and epinephrine, postoperative pyrexia, and postoperative wound infection. RESULTS: The pain score determined using VAS after 1 and 2 h was significantly decreased in Group II than in Group I. However, at 4.8 and 16 h, these results were significantly reversed in Group II than in Group I. The cumulative postoperative opioid consumption was significantly less in Group II than in Group I (50 vs. 90 mg). The onset of mobilization, onset of breastfeeding, and duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter in Group II than in Group I, whereas the TFA request was significantly longer in Group II. CONCLUSION: Administering epinephrine with 2% lidocaine prolongs the anesthetic effect and reduces the opioid analgesic dose postoperatively required, thereby enhancing patient recovery.
Entities:
Keywords:
Local anesthetic; cesarean section; epinephrine; lidocaine
Authors: Anne B Woods; Barbara Crist; Shirley Kowalewski; Joyce Carroll; Joan Warren; Joan Robertson Journal: J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs Date: 2012 May-Jun
Authors: Grace Lim; Francesca L Facco; Naveen Nathan; Jonathan H Waters; Cynthia A Wong; Holger K Eltzschig Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 7.892