ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2025
Association of perioperative intravenous lignocaine and intraoperative neuromonitoring in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: a retrospective study.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of intravenous (IV) lignocaine as an analgesic adjunct is increasing, but its impact on intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the association between IV lignocaine and somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) and motor evoked potential (MEP) during adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgery.
methodsThis retrospective study involved AIS patients who underwent single-stage posterior spinal fusion at a tertiary university hospital from 2020 to 2023. In addition to total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA), patients who received IV lignocaine (1.5 mg/kg bolus at induction followed by 2 mg/kg/h infusion until wound closure) were included (lignocaine group) and matched with those who did not (standard group). Two neurophysiologists independently reviewed SSEP and MEP recordings at five-time points: T1 (10 min post-induction), T2 (during pedicle screw insertion), T3 (during rod insertion or deformity correction), T4 (start of wound closure, 30 min before surgery end), and T5 (post-skin closure). Neurophysiological changes were clinically significant if MEP or SSEP showed > 50% amplitude reduction or > 10% latency increase.
resultsA total of 115 AIS patients receiving TIVA were analysed, 59 in the lignocaine group and 56 in the standard group. Demographics and vital signs were comparable. The mean intraoperative propofol dose was significantly lower in the lignocaine group (766.77 ± 315.86 mg vs 928.55 ± 242.93 mg; p = 0.003). MEP amplitudes over the right tibialis anterior and bilateral abductor hallucis were significantly reduced in the lignocaine group (p < 0.05). SSEP analysis revealed significant amplitude reduction and latency prolongation at the left cortical in the lignocaine group at all time points (p < 0.05). Longitudinal changes (T1-T4) in amplitude and latency for both MEP and SSEP were small and not clinically significant.
conclusionPerioperative IV lignocaine infusion during TIVA for AIS surgery significantly reduced MEP and SSEP amplitudes and prolonged SSEP latency, though lacking clinical significance.
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.