Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16235310›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005

Transient neurologic symptoms (TNS) following spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine versus other local anaesthetics.

D Zaric, C Christiansen, N L Pace, Y Punjasawadwong

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Opening remarks.Journal of anesthesia · 2007
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

D ZaricFrederiksberg Hospital, Dept. of Anaesthesiology, Ndr. Fasanvej 57, Frederiksberg, Denmark. Dusanka.Zaric@fh.hosp.dk
C Christiansen
N L Pace
Y Punjasawadwong
Frederiksberg Hospital · DKChiang Mai University · THUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpinal anaesthesia has been in use since the turn of the late nineteenth century. During the last decade there has been an increase in the number of reports implicating lidocaine as a possible cause of temporary and permanent neurologic complications after spinal anaesthesia. Follow-up of patients who received uncomplicated spinal anaesthesia revealed that some of them developed pain in the lower extremities after an initial full recovery. This painful condition that occurs in the immediate postoperative period was named "transient neurologic symptoms" (TNS).

objectivesTo study the frequency of TNS and neurologic complications after spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine, compared to other local anaesthetics. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005); MEDLINE (1966 to January 2005); EMBASE (1980 to week 6, 2005); LILACS (March 2005); and handsearched the reference lists of trials and review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized and pseudo-randomized studies comparing the frequency of TNS and of neurologic complications after spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine as compared to other local anaesthetics. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant studies and extracted the data from the included studies. MAIN

resultsFifteen trials, reporting 1437 patients, 120 of whom developed transient neurologic symptoms, were included in the analysis. The use of lidocaine for spinal anaesthesia increased the risk of developing TNS. There was no evidence that this painful condition was associated with any neurologic pathology; the symptoms disappeared spontaneously by the fifth postoperative day. The relative risk (RR) for developing TNS after spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine as compared to other local anaesthetics (bupivacaine, prilocaine, procaine, levobupivacaine and ropivacaine) was 7.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.02, 12.75). AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe risk of developing TNS after spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine was significantly higher than when bupivacaine, prilocaine and procaine were used. The term "TNS", which implies a positive neurologic finding, should not be used for this painful condition. One study about the impact of TNS on patient satisfaction and functional impairment demonstrated that non-TNS patients were more satisfied and had less functional impairment after surgery than TNS patients, but this did not influence their willingness to recommend spinal anaesthesia.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, SpinalAnesthetics, LocalHumansLegLidocainePainPeripheral Nervous System DiseasesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnesthetics, LocalLidocaine

Identifiers

PMID16235310
OpenAlexW4231508224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.