BACKGROUND Open major abdominal surgery is one of the most risky surgical procedures for acute postoperative pain. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) has been considered the standard analgesic approach. In different reports, lidocaine i.v. has been shown to have an analgesic efficacy comparable with TEA. We compared the analgesic efficacy of i.v. lidocaine with thoracic epidural analgesia using bupivacaine in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. METHODS In this non-inferiority clinical trial, 210 patients were randomised to thoracic epidural bupivacaine with morphine or i.v. lidocaine. Dynamic pain at 24 h after surgery was measured using a numerical pain rating scale (NPR), and morphine consumption was also measured. A difference in i.v. the lidocaine-epidural bupivacaine NPR of ≤1 for dynamic pain was considered a non-inferiority margin. RESULTS The NPR for dynamic pain in the lidocaine group at 24 h was between 5.7 (1.8) and 5.2 (1.9) in the epidural group, with a difference of 0.53 (95% confidence interval 0.0-1.0). In the first 24 h, the average difference in morphine consumption was 1.8 mg between the i.v. lidocaine and epidural groups (95% confidence interval 1-3 mg). No differences were found in adverse events or complications associated with the procedures. CONCLUSIONS Intravenous lidocaine is non-inferior to thoracic epidural analgesia for acute postoperative pain control in major abdomial surgery at 24 h postoperatively. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NCT04017013.
Therapeutic efficacy of intravenous lidocaine infusion compared with thoracic epidural analgesia in major abdominal surgery: a non-inferiority randomised clinical trial.
F. D. Casas-Arroyave,Susana C. Osorno-Upegui,Mario A. Zamudio-Burbano
Published 2023 in British Journal of Anaesthesia
ABSTRACT
PUBLICATION RECORD
- Publication year
2023
- Venue
British Journal of Anaesthesia
- Publication date
2023-09-01
- Fields of study
Medicine
- Identifiers
- External record
- Source metadata
Semantic Scholar, PubMed
CITATION MAP
EXTRACTION MAP
CLAIMS
- No claims are published for this paper.
CONCEPTS
- No concepts are published for this paper.
REFERENCES
Showing 1-31 of 31 references · Page 1 of 1
CITED BY
Showing 1-27 of 27 citing papers · Page 1 of 1