Michael R Boswell1, Rajat N Moman1, Melissa Burtoft1, Harrison Gerdes1, Jacob Martinez1, Danielle J Gerberi2, Erica Wittwer1, M Hassan Murad3, W Michael Hooten4,5. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA. 2. Mayo Clinic Library, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Division of Preventative Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 4. Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA. hooten.william@mayo.edu. 5. Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. hooten.william@mayo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Lidocaine is one of the most widely used local anesthetics with well-known pharmacological properties. The purpose of this systematic review is to investigate the effects of lidocaine on postoperative pain scores and recovery after cardiac surgery. METHODS: A comprehensive database search was conducted by a reference librarian for randomized clinical trials (RCT) from January 1, 1980 to September 1, 2019. Eligible study designs included randomized controlled trials of lidocaine for postoperative pain management in adults undergoing cardiac surgery. After removal of duplicates, 947 records were screened for eligibility and 3 RCTs met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Sources of bias were identified in 2 of 3 RCTs. Lidocaine was administered intravenously, topically, and intrapleurally. Key findings included [1] 2% lidocaine placed topically on chest tube prior to intraoperative insertion was associated with significantly lower pain scores and lower cumulative doses of fentanyl; and [2] 2% lidocaine administered intrapleurally was associated with significantly lower pain scores and significant improvements in pulmonary mechanics. Lidocaine infusions were not associated with significant changes in pain scores or measures of recovery. No significant associations were observed between lidocaine and overall mortality, hospital length of stay or ICU length of stay. No data were reported for postoperative nausea and vomiting or arrhythmias. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the favorable risk profile of topical lidocaine and the need for further advancements in the postoperative care of adults after cardiac surgery, topically administered lidocaine could be considered for incorporation into established postoperative recovery protocols.
OBJECTIVE:Lidocaine is one of the most widely used local anesthetics with well-known pharmacological properties. The purpose of this systematic review is to investigate the effects of lidocaine on postoperative pain scores and recovery after cardiac surgery. METHODS: A comprehensive database search was conducted by a reference librarian for randomized clinical trials (RCT) from January 1, 1980 to September 1, 2019. Eligible study designs included randomized controlled trials of lidocaine for postoperative pain management in adults undergoing cardiac surgery. After removal of duplicates, 947 records were screened for eligibility and 3 RCTs met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Sources of bias were identified in 2 of 3 RCTs. Lidocaine was administered intravenously, topically, and intrapleurally. Key findings included [1] 2% lidocaine placed topically on chest tube prior to intraoperative insertion was associated with significantly lower pain scores and lower cumulative doses of fentanyl; and [2] 2% lidocaine administered intrapleurally was associated with significantly lower pain scores and significant improvements in pulmonary mechanics. Lidocaine infusions were not associated with significant changes in pain scores or measures of recovery. No significant associations were observed between lidocaine and overall mortality, hospital length of stay or ICU length of stay. No data were reported for postoperative nausea and vomiting or arrhythmias. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the favorable risk profile of topical lidocaine and the need for further advancements in the postoperative care of adults after cardiac surgery, topically administered lidocaine could be considered for incorporation into established postoperative recovery protocols.
Authors: Manon Choinière; Judy Watt-Watson; J Charles Victor; Roger J F Baskett; Jean S Bussières; Michel Carrier; Jennifer Cogan; Judy Costello; Christopher Feindel; Marie-Claude Guertin; Mélanie Racine; Marie-Christine Taillefer Journal: CMAJ Date: 2014-02-24 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Christopher Noss; Christopher Prusinkiewicz; Gregg Nelson; Prakash A Patel; John G Augoustides; Alexander J Gregory Journal: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 2.628
Authors: Hans J Gerbershagen; Sanjay Aduckathil; Albert J M van Wijck; Linda M Peelen; Cor J Kalkman; Winfried Meissner Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Lesley B Milgrom; Jo Ann Brooks; Rong Qi; Karen Bunnell; Susie Wuestfeld; Daniel Beckman Journal: Am J Crit Care Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Daniel T Engelman; Walid Ben Ali; Judson B Williams; Louis P Perrault; V Seenu Reddy; Rakesh C Arora; Eric E Roselli; Ali Khoynezhad; Marc Gerdisch; Jerrold H Levy; Kevin Lobdell; Nick Fletcher; Matthias Kirsch; Gregg Nelson; Richard M Engelman; Alexander J Gregory; Edward M Boyle Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 14.766