围手术期输注利多卡因与胸椎硬膜外镇痛对腹部手术疼痛管理的比较疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Gustavo R.M. Wegner , Bruno F.M. Wegner , Ramon Huntermann , Manoela L. Pinto , Júlia A.P. Vieira , Amanda P. de Souza , Francisco J.L. Bezerra
{"title":"围手术期输注利多卡因与胸椎硬膜外镇痛对腹部手术疼痛管理的比较疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Gustavo R.M. Wegner ,&nbsp;Bruno F.M. Wegner ,&nbsp;Ramon Huntermann ,&nbsp;Manoela L. Pinto ,&nbsp;Júlia A.P. Vieira ,&nbsp;Amanda P. de Souza ,&nbsp;Francisco J.L. Bezerra","doi":"10.1016/j.bjane.2025.844616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Recent randomized clinical trials have compared the perioperative use of Intravenous (IV) lidocaine and Thoracic Epidural Analgesia (TEA) for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic search was conducted on Embase, Web of Science (all databases), Cochrane Library, and PubMed on March 25, 2024, adhering to the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA guidelines.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Out of 1261 screened studies, 6 were included. TEA provided superior pain relief on a 0 to 10 pain scale at rest compared to IV lidocaine at 2 (n = 335, MD = -0.72, 95% CI -0.19 to -1.25, p = 0.007423, I<sup>2</sup> = 83%) and 24 hours postoperatively (n = 402; MD = -0.18, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.23; p &lt; 0.000001, I<sup>2</sup> = 18%). However, no statistically significant differences were observed on pain scores at rest at 48 and 72 hours. TEA provided superior pain relief on a 0 to 10 pain scale during coughing at 24 hours postoperatively (n = 360; MD = -0.36, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.52, p = 0.000019, I<sup>2</sup> = 2%), but no statistically significant differences were observed in pain scores on coughing at 48 and 72 hours. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to first flatus, or length of hospital stay.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>TEA provides more effective postoperative pain relief compared to IV lidocaine during the first postoperative day, as evidenced by analyses of pain both at rest and during coughing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":32356,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":"75 3","pages":"Article 844616"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative efficacy of perioperative lidocaine infusion versus thoracic epidural analgesia for pain management in abdominal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Gustavo R.M. Wegner ,&nbsp;Bruno F.M. Wegner ,&nbsp;Ramon Huntermann ,&nbsp;Manoela L. Pinto ,&nbsp;Júlia A.P. Vieira ,&nbsp;Amanda P. de Souza ,&nbsp;Francisco J.L. Bezerra\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bjane.2025.844616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Recent randomized clinical trials have compared the perioperative use of Intravenous (IV) lidocaine and Thoracic Epidural Analgesia (TEA) for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic search was conducted on Embase, Web of Science (all databases), Cochrane Library, and PubMed on March 25, 2024, adhering to the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA guidelines.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Out of 1261 screened studies, 6 were included. TEA provided superior pain relief on a 0 to 10 pain scale at rest compared to IV lidocaine at 2 (n = 335, MD = -0.72, 95% CI -0.19 to -1.25, p = 0.007423, I<sup>2</sup> = 83%) and 24 hours postoperatively (n = 402; MD = -0.18, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.23; p &lt; 0.000001, I<sup>2</sup> = 18%). However, no statistically significant differences were observed on pain scores at rest at 48 and 72 hours. TEA provided superior pain relief on a 0 to 10 pain scale during coughing at 24 hours postoperatively (n = 360; MD = -0.36, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.52, p = 0.000019, I<sup>2</sup> = 2%), but no statistically significant differences were observed in pain scores on coughing at 48 and 72 hours. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to first flatus, or length of hospital stay.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>TEA provides more effective postoperative pain relief compared to IV lidocaine during the first postoperative day, as evidenced by analyses of pain both at rest and during coughing.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":\"75 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 844616\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0104001425000326\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0104001425000326","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:最近的随机临床试验比较了围手术期静脉注射(IV)利多卡因和胸廓硬膜外镇痛(TEA)在腹部手术患者术后镇痛中的应用。方法:根据Cochrane Handbook和PRISMA指南,于2024年3月25日在Embase、Web of Science(所有数据库)、Cochrane Library和PubMed进行系统检索。结果:在1261项被筛选的研究中,6项被纳入。茶提供优越的疼痛在0到10疼痛第四静止的规模相比,利多卡因在2 (n = 335,MD = -0.72,95%可信区间-0.19到-1.25,p = 0.007423,I2 = 83%),术后24小时(n = 402;MD = -0.18,95% CI -0.12 ~ -0.23;p < 0.000001, I2 = 18%)。然而,48小时和72小时休息时疼痛评分无统计学差异。术后24小时,TEA在0 - 10级的咳嗽疼痛评分中提供了优越的疼痛缓解(n = 360;MD = -0.36,95% CI -0.19 ~ -0.52, p = 0.000019,I2 = 2%),但48小时和72小时咳嗽疼痛评分差异无统计学意义。术后恶心和呕吐、首次放屁时间或住院时间方面无统计学差异。结论:与静脉注射利多卡因相比,TEA在术后第一天提供了更有效的术后疼痛缓解,这一点得到了休息和咳嗽时疼痛分析的证明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative efficacy of perioperative lidocaine infusion versus thoracic epidural analgesia for pain management in abdominal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Recent randomized clinical trials have compared the perioperative use of Intravenous (IV) lidocaine and Thoracic Epidural Analgesia (TEA) for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted on Embase, Web of Science (all databases), Cochrane Library, and PubMed on March 25, 2024, adhering to the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA guidelines.

Results

Out of 1261 screened studies, 6 were included. TEA provided superior pain relief on a 0 to 10 pain scale at rest compared to IV lidocaine at 2 (n = 335, MD = -0.72, 95% CI -0.19 to -1.25, p = 0.007423, I2 = 83%) and 24 hours postoperatively (n = 402; MD = -0.18, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.23; p < 0.000001, I2 = 18%). However, no statistically significant differences were observed on pain scores at rest at 48 and 72 hours. TEA provided superior pain relief on a 0 to 10 pain scale during coughing at 24 hours postoperatively (n = 360; MD = -0.36, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.52, p = 0.000019, I2 = 2%), but no statistically significant differences were observed in pain scores on coughing at 48 and 72 hours. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to first flatus, or length of hospital stay.

Conclusions

TEA provides more effective postoperative pain relief compared to IV lidocaine during the first postoperative day, as evidenced by analyses of pain both at rest and during coughing.
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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
68 days
×
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