选择性腹腔镜胆囊切除术全麻下静脉注射两种不同剂量利多卡因镇痛的剂量反应比较

IF 0.5 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Sunana Gupta, Prerna Attal, Nandita Mehta, Heena Saini, Sitikantha Banerjee
{"title":"选择性腹腔镜胆囊切除术全麻下静脉注射两种不同剂量利多卡因镇痛的剂量反应比较","authors":"Sunana Gupta, Prerna Attal, Nandita Mehta, Heena Saini, Sitikantha Banerjee","doi":"10.1186/s42077-023-00390-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background Various studies have demonstrated the analgesic benefit of systemic lidocaine in the perioperative setting, especially during laparoscopic abdominal surgery. However, the best appropriate dose for an administered bolus and continuous infusion of lignocaine is unclear. Our aim is to compare the effect of two different doses of intravenous lidocaine for analgesia in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia. Fifty-four patients of ASA PS I or II, aged between 18 and 65 years undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups of 26 patients each. Patients in group A received an intravenous bolus injection of lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg slowly over 10 min, prior to induction and then followed by a continuous infusion at the rate of 1.5 mg/kg/h via infusion pump whereas group B patients received intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg slowly over 10 min followed by infusion at the rate of 2 mg/kg/h. Postoperative analgesia was assessed by VAS score, time to first analgesic dose, and total consumption of rescue analgesic in 24 h. Results There was a statistically significant difference in mean VAS Scores between the two groups at different time intervals postoperatively. Time to first rescue analgesia was earlier in group A (30.65 min) compared to group B (49.42 min) and the difference was statistically significant. Total consumption of rescue analgesic was higher in group A with a mean of 178.85 mg compared to 126.92 mg in group B. Conclusion Both the infusion doses of Lidocaine provided clinically adequate analgesia postoperatively but the infusion dose of 2 mg/kg/h had a mean VAS score significantly lower than 1.5 mg/kg/h.","PeriodicalId":7686,"journal":{"name":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of dose–response to two different doses of intravenous lidocaine for analgesia in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia\",\"authors\":\"Sunana Gupta, Prerna Attal, Nandita Mehta, Heena Saini, Sitikantha Banerjee\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s42077-023-00390-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Background Various studies have demonstrated the analgesic benefit of systemic lidocaine in the perioperative setting, especially during laparoscopic abdominal surgery. However, the best appropriate dose for an administered bolus and continuous infusion of lignocaine is unclear. Our aim is to compare the effect of two different doses of intravenous lidocaine for analgesia in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia. Fifty-four patients of ASA PS I or II, aged between 18 and 65 years undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups of 26 patients each. Patients in group A received an intravenous bolus injection of lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg slowly over 10 min, prior to induction and then followed by a continuous infusion at the rate of 1.5 mg/kg/h via infusion pump whereas group B patients received intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg slowly over 10 min followed by infusion at the rate of 2 mg/kg/h. Postoperative analgesia was assessed by VAS score, time to first analgesic dose, and total consumption of rescue analgesic in 24 h. Results There was a statistically significant difference in mean VAS Scores between the two groups at different time intervals postoperatively. Time to first rescue analgesia was earlier in group A (30.65 min) compared to group B (49.42 min) and the difference was statistically significant. Total consumption of rescue analgesic was higher in group A with a mean of 178.85 mg compared to 126.92 mg in group B. Conclusion Both the infusion doses of Lidocaine provided clinically adequate analgesia postoperatively but the infusion dose of 2 mg/kg/h had a mean VAS score significantly lower than 1.5 mg/kg/h.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42077-023-00390-y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42077-023-00390-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

各种研究已经证明全身利多卡因在围手术期的镇痛作用,特别是在腹腔镜腹部手术中。然而,给药和持续输注利多卡因的最佳适当剂量尚不清楚。我们的目的是比较两种不同剂量的静脉利多卡因在全麻下择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者的镇痛效果。选择54例ASA PS I或II级患者,年龄18 ~ 65岁,在全麻下行选择性腹腔镜胆囊切除术,随机分为两组,每组26例。A组患者在诱导前先静脉滴注利多卡因1.5 mg/kg,缓慢注射10 min,然后通过输注泵以1.5 mg/kg/h的速度持续输注;B组患者静脉滴注利多卡因1.5 mg/kg,缓慢注射10 min,然后以2 mg/kg/h的速度持续输注。通过VAS评分、第一次给药时间、24 h抢救镇痛药总消耗来评价两组患者术后镇痛效果。结果两组患者术后不同时间间隔VAS评分平均值比较,差异均有统计学意义。A组第一次抢救镇痛时间(30.65 min)早于B组(49.42 min),差异有统计学意义。A组抢救镇痛药总用量平均为178.85 mg,高于b组126.92 mg。结论利多卡因输注剂量均能提供临床足够的术后镇痛,但输注剂量为2 mg/kg/h时VAS评分均显著低于1.5 mg/kg/h。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of dose–response to two different doses of intravenous lidocaine for analgesia in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia
Abstract Background Various studies have demonstrated the analgesic benefit of systemic lidocaine in the perioperative setting, especially during laparoscopic abdominal surgery. However, the best appropriate dose for an administered bolus and continuous infusion of lignocaine is unclear. Our aim is to compare the effect of two different doses of intravenous lidocaine for analgesia in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia. Fifty-four patients of ASA PS I or II, aged between 18 and 65 years undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups of 26 patients each. Patients in group A received an intravenous bolus injection of lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg slowly over 10 min, prior to induction and then followed by a continuous infusion at the rate of 1.5 mg/kg/h via infusion pump whereas group B patients received intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg slowly over 10 min followed by infusion at the rate of 2 mg/kg/h. Postoperative analgesia was assessed by VAS score, time to first analgesic dose, and total consumption of rescue analgesic in 24 h. Results There was a statistically significant difference in mean VAS Scores between the two groups at different time intervals postoperatively. Time to first rescue analgesia was earlier in group A (30.65 min) compared to group B (49.42 min) and the difference was statistically significant. Total consumption of rescue analgesic was higher in group A with a mean of 178.85 mg compared to 126.92 mg in group B. Conclusion Both the infusion doses of Lidocaine provided clinically adequate analgesia postoperatively but the infusion dose of 2 mg/kg/h had a mean VAS score significantly lower than 1.5 mg/kg/h.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信