Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26044546›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2015

Efficacy of Intravenous Lidocaine for Postoperative Analgesia Following Laparoscopic Surgery: A Meta-Analysis.

Nicholas T Ventham, Ewan D Kennedy, Richard R Brady, Hugh M Paterson, Doug Speake, Irwin Foo, Kenneth C H Fearon

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 36 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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.

NCT02483611 phase4completednot on this map

Effect of Intravenous Infusion of Magnesium Sulfate Associated or Not to Lidocaine On the Neuromuscular Blockade Induced by Muscle Relaxant Cistracurium

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Sao PauloRan2015 to 2015Enrolled48ConditionsNeuromuscular BlockArmsMagnesium Sulfate, Lidocaine, Isotonic Solution, Cisatracurium
NCT04017013 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Therapeutic Efficacy of Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion Compared With Epidural Analgesia for Postoperative Pain Control in Adult Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery: Non-Inferiority Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversidad de AntioquiaRan2020 to 2022Enrolled210ConditionsPain, Postoperative, Opioid UseArmsEpidural Analgesia, Lidocaine Infusion
NCT04398316 phase4terminatednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

High Dose Intravenous Lidocaine vs Hydromorphone for Acute Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized, Comparative Efficacy Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHennepin Healthcare Research InstituteRan2021 to 2021Enrolled4ConditionsAbdominal Pain, Renal ColicArmsLidocaine Iv, HYDROmorphone Injection
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Examining Canadian Trauma Centres' Analgesic Protocols for Rib Fractures.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicholas T VenthamDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road South, Edinburgh, EH4 2XU, UK, nicholas.ventham@ed.ac.uk.
Ewan D Kennedy
Richard R Brady
Hugh M Paterson
Doug Speake
Irwin Foo
Kenneth C H Fearon
Western General Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntravenous (IV) lidocaine has analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of IV lidocaine in controlling postoperative pain following laparoscopic surgery.

methodsA meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IV lidocaine versus placebo/routine treatment for postoperative analgesia following laparoscopic surgery. The primary outcome was opiate requirement at 24 h. Secondary outcomes included cumulative opiate requirement, numerical pain scores (2, 12, 24, 48 h at rest and on movement), recovery indices (nausea and vomiting, length of stay, time until diet resumption, first flatus and bowel movement) and side effects (cardiac/neurological toxicity). Subgroup analyses were performed according to operation type and to compare IV lidocaine with intraperitoneal lidocaine.

resultsFourteen RCTs with 742 patients were included. IV lidocaine was associated with a small but significant reduction in opiate requirement at 24 h compared with placebo/routine care. IV lidocaine was associated with reduced cumulative opiate requirement, reduced pain scores at rest at 2, 12 and 24 h, reduced nausea and vomiting and a shorter time until resumption of diet. The length of stay did not differ between groups. There was a low incidence of IV lidocaine-associated toxicity. In subgroup analyses, there was no difference between IV and intraperitoneal lidocaine in the measured outcomes.

conclusionsIV lidocaine has a multidimensional effect on the quality of recovery. IV lidocaine was associated with lower opiate requirements, reduced nausea and vomiting and a shorter time until resumption of diet. Whilst IV lidocaine appears safe, the optimal treatment regimen remains unknown. Statistical heterogeneity was high.

Indexed as

Administration, IntravenousAnalgesiaAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, LocalEatingHumansLaparoscopyLidocaineNauseaPain MeasurementPostoperative PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVomitingAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, LocalLidocaine

Identifiers

PMID26044546
OpenAlexW571020357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.