ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Effects of intravenously infused lidocaine on analgesia and gastrointestinal function of patients receiving laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effects of intravenously infused lidocaine on analgesia and gastrointestinal function of patients receiving laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.
methodsSeventy-eight patients with cholelithiasis were randomly divided into a treatment group and a control group (n=39) that all had laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. The treatment group was intravenously infused with 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine by using a venous pump under anesthesia induction at the speed of 2 mg·kg(-1) ·h(-1) until the end of surgery, while the control group was given normal saline with the same volume.
resultsAll patients successfully completed the surgery, with similar surgical time, incision length and intraoperative blood loss. The required lidocaine concentrations of the treatment group were 2.64±1.23 μg/ml, 1.14±0.4 μg/ml and 0.93±0.32 μg/ml respectively 2 hour, 12 hour and 48 hour after surgery. Pain score of the treatment group, which was significantly lower than that of the control group at the postoperative 2 hour (P<0.05), was similar to those of the control group at the postoperative 12 hour and 48 hour. With extended time, the pain score significantly decreased (P<0.05). The treatment group had significantly shorter first anal exhaust time and first defecation time than those of the control group (P<0.05). Adverse reactions, such as nausea and vomiting, dizziness, headache, subcutaneous emphysema and fat liquefaction of incision, occurred similarly in the two groups, which were alleviated by symptomatic treatment.
conclusionLaparoscopic common bile duct exploration is a promising minimally invasive surgery for patients with cholelithiasis, during which intravenously infused lidocaine can rapidly recover the gastrointestinal function and exert short-term analgesic effects, with mild adverse reactions also.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.