Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27149489›Full record

Trial reportMedicine2016

Efficacy of Intravenous Lidocaine During Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Gastric Neoplasm: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Study.

Ji Eun Kim, Jong Bum Choi, Bon-Nyeo Koo, Hae Won Jeong, Byung Ho Lee, So Yeon Kim

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ji Eun KimFrom the Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon (JEK, JBC, HWJ, BHL), and Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Severance Hospital, Anesthesia and Pain Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul (BNK, SYK), Republic of Korea.
Jong Bum Choi
Bon-Nyeo Koo
Hae Won Jeong
Byung Ho Lee
So Yeon Kim
Pain Management Institute · USYonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an advanced therapy for early gastric neoplasm and requires sedation with adequate analgesia. Lidocaine is a short-acting local anesthetic, and intravenous lidocaine has been shown to have analgesic efficacy in surgical settings. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of intravenous lidocaine on analgesic and sedative requirements for ESD and pain after ESD.Sixty-six patients scheduled for ESD randomly received either intravenous lidocaine as a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg before sedation, followed by continuous infusion at a rate of 2 mg/kg/h during sedation (lidocaine group; n = 33) or the same bolus and infusion volumes of normal saline (control group; n = 33). Sedation was achieved with propofol and fentanyl. The primary outcome was fentanyl requirement during ESD. We recorded hemodynamics and any events during ESD and evaluated post-ESD epigastric and throat pain.Fentanyl requirement during ESD reduced by 24% in the lidocaine group compared with the control group (105 ± 28 vs. 138 ± 37 μg, mean ± SD; P < 0.001). The lidocaine group reached sedation faster [40 (20-100) vs. 55 (30-120) s, median (range); P = 0.001], and incidence of patient movement during ESD decreased in the lidocaine group (3% vs. 26%, P = 0.026). Numerical rating scale for epigastric pain was significantly lower at 6 hours after ESD [2 (0-6) vs. 3 (0-8), median (range); P = 0.023] and incidence of throat pain was significantly lower in the lidocaine group (27% vs. 65%, P = 0.003). No adverse events associated with lidocaine were discovered.Administration of intravenous lidocaine reduced fentanyl requirement and decreased patient movement during ESD. Moreover, it alleviated epigastric and throat pain after ESD. Thus, we conclude that the use of intravenous adjuvant lidocaine is a new and safe sedative method during ESD.

Indexed as

Abdominal PainAdenocarcinomaAdenomaAdministration, IntravenousAgedAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, LocalDeep SedationDissectionDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFentanylGastric MucosaGastroscopyHumansHypnotics and SedativesAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, LocalFentanylHypnotics and SedativesLidocainePropofol

Identifiers

PMID27149489
PMCPMC4863806
OpenAlexW2461677144

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.