Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2026
Effect of Perioperative Intravenous Lidocaine on Rebound Pain After Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block for Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rebound pain after single-shot interscalene brachial plexus block may diminish the early analgesic benefit of regional anesthesia after shoulder arthroscopy. We evaluated whether perioperative intravenous lidocaine reduces rebound pain after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Methods: In this single-center randomized, placebo-controlled Phase II trial, 120 adults receiving interscalene block plus general anesthesia were allocated 1:1 to saline or lidocaine. Lidocaine was given as a 1 mg/kg ideal-body-weight loading dose before induction followed by 2 mg·kg Results: Rebound pain occurred in 14/60 participants (23.3%) with lidocaine and 22/60 (36.7%) with saline [risk difference -13.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -28.8% to 3.1%; relative risk 0.64, 95% CI 0.36-1.12; P = 0.163]. Median peak movement-evoked numerical rating scale scores were 5 in both groups (P = 0.136). The mean intraoperative remifentanil infusion rate was lower with lidocaine (mean difference -81.67 μg/h, 95% CI -101.47 to -61.86; P < 0.001). Baseline-adjusted discharge University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder Scores were higher and postoperative 9-item Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI-9) scores were lower with lidocaine (both P < 0.001); these outcomes were exploratory. Although 60 participants per group were enrolled, a corrected post hoc calculation indicated that approximately 82 evaluable participants per group were required for the prespecified effect. The lower composite adverse-event rate was mainly attributable to less propofol injection pain. Conclusion: This trial did not establish a statistically significant reduction in 24-hour rebound pain with perioperative intravenous lidocaine. Because the study was potentially underpowered, a clinically meaningful effect cannot be excluded. Lidocaine was associated with a lower mean intraoperative remifentanil infusion rate, whereas other recovery findings were exploratory. Larger adequately powered trials are needed before lidocaine can be recommended to prevent rebound pain. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2500103951; registered June 9, 2025. Registry record: https://www.chictr.org.cn/hvshowproject.html?id=278342andv=1.0.
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.