Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38138926›Full record

ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2023

A Review of the Lidocaine in the Perioperative Period.

Abigail Silva, Joana Mourão, Nuno Vale

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors.

Abigail SilvaPerMed Research Group, Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), Rua Doutor Plácido da Costa, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal.
Joana MourãoCINTESIS@RISE, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Alameda Professor Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3062-0281
Nuno ValePerMed Research Group, Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), Rua Doutor Plácido da Costa, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1283-1042

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review analyzes the controversies surrounding lidocaine (LIDO), a widely recognized local anesthetic, by exploring its multifaceted effects on pain control in the perioperative setting. The article critically analyzes debates about lidocaine's efficacy, safety, and optimal administration methods. While acknowledging its well-documented analgesic attributes, the text highlights the ongoing controversies in its application. The goal is to provide clinicians with a comprehensive understanding of the current discourse, enabling informed decisions about incorporating lidocaine into perioperative protocols. On the other hand, emphasizes the common uses of lidocaine and its potential role in personalized medicine. It discusses the medication's versatility, including its application in anesthesia, chronic pain, and cardiovascular diseases. The text recognizes lidocaine's widespread use in medical practice and its ability to be combined with other drugs, showcasing its adaptability for individualized treatments. Additionally, it explores the incorporation of lidocaine into hyaluronic acid injections and its impact on pharmacokinetics, signaling innovative approaches. The discussion centers on how lidocaine, within the realm of personalized medicine, can offer safer and more comfortable experiences for patients through tailored treatments.

Indexed as

administrationlidocainepain controlperioperative opioid

Identifiers

PMID38138926
PMCPMC10744742

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.