SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2026
Effects of perioperative intravenous lidocaine on postoperative recovery quality in thoracoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThoracoscopic surgery, while minimally invasive, is associated with significant postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, and hemodynamic instability, which can impede recovery. Intravenous lidocaine has been proposed as a multimodal analgesic adjunct due to its potential anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of perioperative intravenous lidocaine on recovery outcomes in patients undergoing thoracoscopic surgery.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in seven databases (CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, CBM, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) from their inception to August 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intravenous lidocaine versus saline placebo in thoracoscopic surgery. Primary outcomes were postoperative pain scores (VAS/NRS) and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Secondary outcomes included postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC), intraoperative fentanyl consumption, postoperative opioid consumption, hemodynamic parameters (MAP, HR), and Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) scores. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD420251183680).
resultsFifteen RCTs involving 1103 patients were included. Lidocaine significantly reduced pain scores at all time points (0–48 h), with peak effect at 2 h (MD = -1.68, P < 0.00001). PONV incidence was lower in the lidocaine group (OR: 0.42, P < 0.00001). Although not statistically significant, a trend toward reduced postoperative pulmonary complications was observed (OR: 0.82, P = 0.26). Intraoperative fentanyl consumption (MD: -92.10, P < 0.00001) and postoperative opioid use (MD: -0.64, P = 0.03) were significantly lower in the lidocaine group. Lidocaine also attenuated hemodynamic responses during intubation and extubation (MAP and HR, P < 0.00001) and improved QoR-40 scores (MD: 2.98, P = 0.003). Regarding safety, reported adverse events were minor and transient, but current evidence is insufficient to fully characterize the safety profile due to inconsistent monitoring and reporting across trials.
conclusionPerioperative intravenous lidocaine enhances recovery after thoracoscopic surgery by improving analgesia, reducing PONV and opioid use, stabilizing hemodynamics, and promoting overall recovery quality. It should be considered within multimodal ERAS protocols. Further standardized RCTs are warranted to optimize dosing and assess long-term benefits.
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.