Dataset Information

Intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the role of intravenous lidocaine as a supplemental pain control modality in patients undergoing spine surgery.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the use of supplemental intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery. We developed a comprehensive search strategy to adequately screen for randomized controlled trials involving intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery. Continuous outcomes included postoperative opiate consumption and postoperative pain scores. Dichotomous outcomes included nausea, vomiting, pneumonia, delirium, and wound infection.

Results

A total of 3 RCTs comprising 235 patients were selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Cumulative morphine consumption at 48 h was not statistically significant between lidocaine and control groups. Postoperative pain was not statistically significant at any measured time points in the first and second day postoperatively. There was no statistical difference in postoperative complications including nausea, vomiting, pneumonia, delirium, or surgical site infection.

Conclusion

Our results indicated that current literature does not support the use of intravenous lidocaine as an adjunctive measure of pain management after spine surgery. Given the relatively few numbers of studies in this field, further randomized controlled trials are needed to make a definitive conclusion on the effectiveness of lidocaine in spine surgery patients.

SUBMITTER: Haratian A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8819964 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Haratian Aryan A Musa Arif A Field Ryan R Farhan Saif S Bennett Collin C Cooke Christopher C Patel Rakesh D RD Aleem Ilyas S IS Eichler Martin C MC Rajalingam Karan K Lee Carlin C Bederman Samuel S

North American Spine Society journal 20210906

<h4>Background</h4>This study aimed to evaluate the role of intravenous lidocaine as a supplemental pain control modality in patients undergoing spine surgery.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the use of supplemental intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery. We developed a comprehensive search strategy to adequately screen for randomized controlled trials involving intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery. Continuous outcomes included posto ...[more]

PMID: 35141644

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe effectiveness and safety of intraoperative intravenous magnesium (IIM) on spine surgery remain uncertain, as recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) yielded conflicting results. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of IIM on spine surgery.MethodsA literature search was performed on multiple electronic databases, ClinicalTrial.gov and Google Scholar on July 12th 2021, and reference lists were examined. We selected RCTs comparing the effects of IIM with placebo treatment on spine surgery. We calculated pooled standard mean difference (SMD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confident interval (CI) under a random-effect model. We assessed risk of bias using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Jadad score was applied to assess the quality of each included trial. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to determine the confidence in effect estimates. Sensitivity analysis was conducted by omitting each included study one by one from the pooled analysis. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021266170.FindingsFourteen trials of 781 participants were included. Low- to moderate-quality evidence suggested that IIM reduces postoperative morphine consumption at 24 h (SMD: -1·61 mg, 95% CI: -2·63 to -0·58) and intraoperative remifentanil requirement (SMD: -2·09 ug/h, 95% CI: -3·38 to -0·81). High-quality evidence suggested that IIM reduces the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with placebo (RR: 0·43, 95% CI: 0·26 to 0·71). Besides, moderate-quality evidence suggested that recovery orientation time in the IIM group is longer than control group (SMD: 1·13 min, 95% CI: 0·83 to 1·43).InterpretationIIM as adjuvant analgesics showed overall benefits on spine surgery in terms of reducing analgesic requirement and postoperative nausea and vomiting; however, potential risks of IIM, such as delayed anesthetic awakening, should not be ignored. Future evidence will inform the optimal strategy of IIM administration for patients undergoing spine surgery.FundingThis study was funded by Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation (Grant No :7212117).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Intranasal lidocaine has been shown to be effective in treating patients with acute migraines; however, its efficacy is still controversial. In this study, we intend to assess the efficacy and safety of intranasal lidocaine compared with a placebo or an active comparator for the treatment of migraines. METHOD:PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Scopus databases were searched from their inceptions to November 2018. Randomized controlled studies investigating the efficacy of intranasal lidocaine compared with a placebo or an active comparator were selected. Two reviewers independently extracted and synthesized data using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were success rate, the need for rescue medicine, and relapse occurrences. We registered the study at PROSPERO with an ID of CRD42018116226. RESULTS:Six studies (n = 613) were eligible for the meta-analysis. Overall, the results revealed that the study population who was administered intranasal lidocaine had a lower pain intensity at 5 min (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.61; 95% CI = -1.04 to -0.19) and 15 min (SMD = -0.72; 95% CI = -1.14 to -0.19), had a higher success rate (RR = 3.55; 95% CI: 1.89 to 6.64) and a less frequent need for rescue medicine (RR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.36 to 0.72) than the control group. These beneficial effects were not observed when an antiemetic was administered. Furthermore, intranasal lidocaine use had no significant influence on the relapse rate (RR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.51-1.56), regardless of the use of antiemetics. Using lidocaine caused local irritation in up to 49.4% of the patients in one report but did not cause major adverse events. CONCLUSION:Intranasal lidocaine can be considered a useful option for patients with an acute migraine. It yields a high success rate, a low pain intensity, an infrequent need for rescue medicine, and tolerable adverse events. The administration of antiemetics is an important confounding factor.

Project description:BackgroundWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin for pain management following spine surgery.MethodsIn September 2016, a systematic computer-based search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. RCTs of patients prepared for spine surgery that compared pregabalin with placebo were retrieved. The primary endpoint was the VAS score with rest or mobilization at 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours and 48 hours. The secondary outcomes were complications of nausea, sedation, dizziness, headache, and visual disturbances. After testing for publication bias and heterogeneity between studies, data were aggregated for random-effects models when necessary.ResultsTen clinical studies with 535 patients (pregabalin group = 294, control group = 241) were included in the meta-analysis. Pregabalin was associated with reduced pain scores at 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours, corresponding to a reduction of 1.91 points (95% CI, -4.07 to 0.24 point) at 12 hours, 2.66 points (95% CI, -4.51 to -0.81 point) at 24 hours, and 4.33 points (95% confidence interval, -6.38 to -2.99 point) at 48 hours on a 100-point numeric rating scale. There was no significant difference between VAS scores with mobilization at 12 hours, 24 hours, or 48 hours. Similarly, pregabalin was associated with a reduction in cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours (-7.07, 95% CI -9.84, -4.30) and 48 hours (-6.52, 95% CI -7.78, -5.25, P = 0.000). Furthermore, pregabalin can reduce the occurrence of nausea (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41, 0.79, P = 0.001, number needed to treat = 8.4). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of sedation, dizziness, headache, or visual disturbances.ConclusionsPreoperative use of pregabalin was efficacious in reduction of postoperative pain, total morphine consumption, and the occurrence of nausea following spine surgery. Because the sample size and the number of included studies were limited, a multicenter RCT is needed to identify the effects and optimal dose of pregabalin for reducing acute pain after spine surgery.

Project description:BackgroundCognitive decline after cardiac surgery occurs frequently and persists in a significant proportion of patients. Preclinical studies and human trials suggest that intravenous lidocaine may confer protection in the setting of neurologic injury. It was hypothesized that lidocaine administration would reduce cognitive decline after cardiac surgery compared to placebo.MethodsAfter institutional review board approval, 478 patients undergoing cardiac surgery were enrolled into this multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial. Subjects were randomized to lidocaine 1 mg/kg bolus after the induction of anesthesia followed by a continuous infusion (48 μg · kg · min for the first hour, 24 μg · kg · min for the second hour, and 10 μg · kg · min for the next 46 h) or saline with identical volume and rate changes to preserve blinding. Cognitive function was assessed preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 1 yr postoperatively using a standard neurocognitive test battery. The primary outcome was change in cognitive function between baseline and 6 weeks postoperatively, adjusting for age, years of education, baseline cognition, race, and procedure type.ResultsAmong the 420 allocated subjects who returned for 6-week follow-up (lidocaine: N = 211; placebo: N = 209), there was no difference in the continuous cognitive score change (adjusted mean difference [95% CI], 0.02 (-0.05, 0.08); P = 0.626). Cognitive deficit (greater than 1 SD decline in at least one cognitive domain) at 6 weeks occurred in 41% (87 of 211) in the lidocaine group versus 40% (83 of 209) in the placebo group (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.94 [0.63, 1.41]; P = 0.766). There were no differences in any quality of life outcomes between treatment groups. At the 1-yr follow-up, there continued to be no difference in cognitive score change, cognitive deficit, or quality of life.ConclusionsIntravenous lidocaine administered during and after cardiac surgery did not reduce postoperative cognitive decline at 6 weeks.

Project description:BackgroundMajor abdominal surgery is associated with endothelial glycocalyx disruption. The anti-inflammatory effects of lidocaine were recently associated with endothelial barrier protection.MethodsThis was a single-centre, parallel group, randomized, controlled, double blind, pilot trial. Forty adult patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery were included between December 2016 and March 2017 in the setting of a University Hospital in Brussels (Belgium); reasons for non-inclusion were planned liver resection and conditions associated to increased risk of local anesthetics systemic toxicity. Patients were randomized to receive either lidocaine by continuous intravenous administration or an equivalent volume of 0.9% saline. The primary endpoint was the postoperative syndecan-1 concentration (difference between groups). Near-infrared spectroscopy of the thenar eminence in association with the vascular occlusion test, and contemporary analysis of flow-mediated dilation of the brachial artery were the secondary outcomes, along with haemodynamic data. Blood samples and data were collected before surgery (T0), and at 1-3 h (T1) and 24 h (T2) post-surgery.ResultsSyndecan-1 concentration increased significantly post-surgery (P < 0.001), but without any difference between groups. The near-infrared spectroscopy-derived and flow-mediated dilation-derived variables showed minor changes unrelated to group assignment. Compared with the placebo group, the intervention group had a significantly lower peri-operative mean arterial pressure and cardiac index, despite equally conducted goal-directed haemodynamic management. Postoperative lactate concentrations were similar between groups.ConclusionsLidocaine failed to have any effect on endothelial function. Since in comparisons to other types of clinical situations, syndecan-1 was only slightly upregulated, endothelial dysfunction after major abdominal surgery might be overestimated.Trial registration« ISRCTN Registry » identifier: ISRCTN63417725. Date: 15/06/2020. Retrospectively registered.

Project description:PurposePostoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) occurs frequently after cardiac surgery. The pathophysiology of POCD remains elusive, but previous work showed that intravenous lidocaine may be protective against POCD, possibly by modulating cerebral inflammation. We hypothesized that intravenous lidocaine would attenuate the cerebral inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) by reducing the transcerebral activation gradients of platelets, leukocytes, and/or platelet-leukocyte conjugates.MethodsWe studied 202 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB in this prospective randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial. Subjects were randomized to receive either intravenous lidocaine (bolus + 48-hr infusion) or placebo (identical infusion volume and duration). Paired jugular venous and radial arterial blood samples were drawn at several time points and analyzed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting to identify activated platelets and platelet-leukocyte conjugates. Transcerebral activation gradients were calculated by subtracting arterial values from venous values and were compared between groups using repeated measures regression models with covariate adjustment for age, sex, surgery type, and CPB duration.ResultsBeginning after aortic cross-clamp release and peaking ten minutes after the termination of CPB, the mean (SD) transcerebral activation gradient of platelet-monocyte conjugates decreased in lidocaine-treated vs placebo-treated patients [-1.84 (11.47) mean linear fluorescence intensity (MLFI) vs 1.46 (13.88) MLFI, respectively; mean difference, -4.08 MLFI; 95% confidence interval, -7.86 to -0.29; P = 0.03). No difference was seen at any time point for activated platelets or for platelet-neutrophil conjugates.ConclusionWhile lidocaine did not affect the systemic or transcerebral activation of platelets or leukocytes, we did observe a reduction in the transcerebral activation of platelet-monocyte conjugates after aortic cross-clamp release. This may be a manifestation of reduced cerebral inflammation during cardiopulmonary bypass in response to treatment with lidocaine. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00938964).

Dataset Information

Intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets