Jing Liu1, Xiaoping Liu2, Li-Ping Peng2, Rui Ji3, Chao Liu3, Yan-Qing Li4. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China; Department of Anesthesiology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China. 2. Department of Anesthesiology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China. 4. Department of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China; Laboratory of Translational Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China; Robot Engineering Laboratory for Precise Diagnosis and Therapy of GI Tumor, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Propofol-based sedation is widely used in ERCP procedures, but adverse respiratory or cardiovascular events commonly occur. Intravenous injection of lidocaine has an analgesic effect and can reduce the requirements of fentanyl and propofol during abdominal surgery. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine on propofol requirements during ERCP procedures. METHODS:Forty-eight patients scheduled for ERCP were randomly divided into 2 groups, the lidocaine group and the control group. All patients received .02 mg/kg midazolam and .1 μg/kg sufentanil intravenously as premedication. A bolus of propofol was applied for induction of sedation, and perfusion of propofol was applied for maintenance. Patients in the lidocaine group received a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine intravenously followed by continuous infusion of 2 mg/kg/h, whereas the control group received the same volumes of saline solution. The primary outcome was the propofol requirement during ERCP. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, propofol requirements were reduced by 33.8% in the lidocaine group (212.0 ± 118.2 mg vs 320.0 ± 189.6 mg, P = .023). Involuntary movement was less common in the lidocaine group than in the control group (12.5% vs 41.7%, P = .049). In the lidocaine group, postprocedure pain and fatigue, as measured by the visual analog scale, were significantly reduced (0 [range, 0-4] vs 3 [range, 0-5], P = .005; 2 [range, 0-4] vs 5 [range, 2-8], P < .001).The incidence of oxygen desaturation, hypotension, and bradycardia tended to be lower in the lidocaine group. CONCLUSIONS:Intravenous lidocaine can significantly decrease propofol requirements during ERCP, with higher sedation quality and endoscopist satisfaction. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03996577.).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Propofol-based sedation is widely used in ERCP procedures, but adverse respiratory or cardiovascular events commonly occur. Intravenous injection of lidocaine has an analgesic effect and can reduce the requirements of fentanyl and propofol during abdominal surgery. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine on propofol requirements during ERCP procedures. METHODS: Forty-eight patients scheduled for ERCP were randomly divided into 2 groups, the lidocaine group and the control group. All patients received .02 mg/kg midazolam and .1 μg/kg sufentanil intravenously as premedication. A bolus of propofol was applied for induction of sedation, and perfusion of propofol was applied for maintenance. Patients in the lidocaine group received a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine intravenously followed by continuous infusion of 2 mg/kg/h, whereas the control group received the same volumes of saline solution. The primary outcome was the propofol requirement during ERCP. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, propofol requirements were reduced by 33.8% in the lidocaine group (212.0 ± 118.2 mg vs 320.0 ± 189.6 mg, P = .023). Involuntary movement was less common in the lidocaine group than in the control group (12.5% vs 41.7%, P = .049). In the lidocaine group, postprocedure pain and fatigue, as measured by the visual analog scale, were significantly reduced (0 [range, 0-4] vs 3 [range, 0-5], P = .005; 2 [range, 0-4] vs 5 [range, 2-8], P < .001).The incidence of oxygen desaturation, hypotension, and bradycardia tended to be lower in the lidocaine group. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous lidocaine can significantly decrease propofol requirements during ERCP, with higher sedation quality and endoscopist satisfaction. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03996577.).