Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41185577›Full record

ReviewJournal of Korean medical science2025

Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity Caused by Non-Anesthesiologists: A Narrative Review of Case Reports.

Soo Hee Lee, Ho Kyung Yu, Ju-Tae Sohn

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of Korean medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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.

Soo Hee Lee *Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital, Changwon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6047-633X
Ho Kyung Yu *Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital, Changwon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6986-9394
Ju-Tae SohnDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University College of Medicine, Jinju, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0102-5800

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea NRF-2021R1I1A3040332
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLocal anesthetics are widely utilized by anesthesiologists and physicians to manage pain effectively. Local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) is an infrequent occurrence that can lead to fatal outcomes. Although local anesthetics are commonly employed by non-anesthesiologists, a comprehensive analysis of case reports detailing LAST incidents caused by physicians other than anesthesiologists remains unknown. This review was performed to analyze case reports of LAST induced by non-anesthesiologists.

methodsCase reports regarding LAST induced by non-anesthesiologists were retrieved from PubMed using the following keywords: "bupivacaine toxicity," "levobupivacaine toxicity," "lidocaine toxicity," "ropivacaine toxicity," "tetracaine toxicity," and "prilocaine toxicity" until December 31, 2023. A total of 53 case reports involving 59 patients were identified.

resultsThe distribution of local anesthetic use linked to LAST was as follows: lidocaine alone (59.33%), lidocaine plus prilocaine (11.86%), and bupivacaine or ropivacaine alone (10.17%). The predominant presumed cause of LAST was an overdose of local anesthetics (67.80% of all patients; lidocaine: 75% of local anesthetic overdoses), with or without accompanying patient's risk factors. The primary routes of administration resulting in LAST were subcutaneous infiltration (38.98%) and topical application (35.59%). Common symptoms associated with LAST included central nervous system symptoms alone (50.85%) such as seizures, and combined central nervous and cardiovascular system symptoms (27.12%). Local anesthetics implicated in LAST were predominantly used for pain management during various procedures (71.19%) and for post-operative analgesia (11.86%). Of the patients experiencing LAST, 28.81% received lipid emulsion treatment in addition to supportive measures, achieving a full recovery rate of 100%. Conversely, 71.19% of the patients with LAST received only supportive treatment, leading to a full recovery rate of 73.81%.

conclusionThese findings suggest that subcutaneous infiltration or topical administration of lidocaine overdoses by non-anesthesiologists, particularly in patients with or without risk factors for LAST, significantly contributes to LAST. Preventive strategies, including education on maximum recommended doses of local anesthetics, identification of patient risk factors for LAST, utilization of ultrasound-guided nerve blocks, and ensuring the availability of lipid emulsion treatment, should be emphasized. Lipid emulsions ought to be readily accessible for the management of LAST in all locations where local anesthetics are used.

Indexed as

Anesthetics, LocalAdultBupivacaineFemaleHumansLevobupivacaineLidocaineMaleMiddle AgedPrilocaineRopivacaineTetracaineAnesthetics, LocalBupivacaineLevobupivacaineLidocainePrilocaineRopivacaineTetracaineAnesthesiologistsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsEmulsionsLidocaineLocal AnestheticsSeizures

Identifiers

PMID41185577
PMCPMC12591372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.