World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 42, Issue 10, pp 3112–3119 | Cite as

Intravenous Local Anaesthetic Compared with Intraperitoneal Local Anaesthetic in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review

  • Wiremu S. MacFater
  • Weisi Xia
  • Ahmed Barazanchi
  • Bruce Su’a
  • Darren Svirskis
  • Andrew G. Hill
Scientific Review



Modern perioperative care strategies aim to optimise perioperative care by reducing the body’s stress response to surgery. A major facet of optimising an abdominal surgery analgesia programme is using a multimodal opioid sparing approach. Local anaesthetics have shown promise and there has been considerable research into the most effective route for their administration. This review aims to determine if there is a difference in analgesic efficacy between intraperitoneal local anaesthetic (IPLA) and intravenous local anaesthetic (IVLA).

Materials and Methodology

In concordance with the PRISMA statement, a literature search was conducted to identify randomised control trials that compared IVLA with IPLA in abdominal surgery. The primary outcomes of interest were opioid analgesia requirements and pain score assessed by visual analogue score. Data were extracted and entered into pre-designed electronic spreadsheets.


This review has identified six papers that compared intravenous lignocaine to intraperitoneal lignocaine. This review showed significantly lower morphine consumption at 4 and 24 h in the intraperitoneal group. There was no significant difference in pain scores.


From the analysis of these studies, intraperitoneal local anaesthetic had an analgesic benefit over intravenous lignocaine with regard to decreased opioid consumption for abdominal surgery. Further research investigating IVL combined with intraperitoneal local anaesthetic is warranted.


Author Contributions

WSM designed the study, performed initial screening and review of all articles included, and composed the manuscript. WX assisted in the study design, performed screening and review of all articles included, and assisted in the preparation of the final manuscript. AB assisted in the study design and performed statistical analysis. BS assisted in the study design and in the preparation of the final manuscript. DS is the co-supervisor and assisted in the preparation of the final manuscript. AGH is the senior author and principal investigator, and provided supervision to the co-authors.


  1. 1.
    Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Zargar-Shoshtari K et al (2009) Implementation of ERAS and how to overcome the barriers. Int J Surg 7:16–19CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kehlet H, Wilmore DW (2005) Fast-track surgery. Br J Surg 92:3–4CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boulind CE, Ewings P, Bulley SH et al (2013) Feasibility study of analgesia via epidural versus continuous wound infusion after laparoscopic colorectal resection. Br J Surg 100:395–402CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Choi YY, Park JS, Park SY et al (2015) Can intravenous patient-controlled analgesia be omitted in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer? Ann Surg Treat Res 88:86–91CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Artinyan A, Nunoo-Mensah JW, Balasubramaniam S et al (2008) Prolonged postoperative ileus-definition, risk factors, and predictors after surgery. World J Surg 32:1495–1500. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hah JM, Bateman BT, Ratliff J et al (2017) Chronic opioid use after surgery: implications for perioperative management in the face of the opioid epidemic. Anesth Analg 125:1733–1740CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zargar-Shoshtari K, Hill AG (2008) Optimization of perioperative care for colonic surgery: a review of the evidence. ANZ J Surg 78:13–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eipe N, Gupta S, Penning J (2016) Intravenous lidocaine for acute pain: an evidence-based clinical update. BJA Education 16:292–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kahokehr A (2013) Intraperitoneal local anesthetic for postoperative pain. Saudi J Anaesth 7:5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Shoshtari KZ et al (2011) Intraperitoneal local anesthetic improves recovery after colon resection: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 254:28–38CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Soop M et al (2010) Intraperitoneal use of local anesthetic in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 17:637–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Vather R et al (2010) Systemic levels of local anaesthetic after intra-peritoneal application—a systematic review. Anaesth Intensive Care 38:623–638PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fuhrer Y, Charpentier C, Boulanger G et al (1996) Analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy by intraperitoneal administration of bupivacaine. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 15:128–134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339:b2535CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC et al (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343:d5928CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    (RevMan) RM. Review Manager (RevMan) (2004) In: Collaboration TC editor. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Meth 5:13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jelicic Kadic A, Vucic K, Dosenovic S et al (2016) Extracting data from figures with software was faster, with higher interrater reliability than manual extraction. J Clin Epidemiol 74:119–123CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Digitizer P (2015) Plot Digitizer In: editor, sourceforge.netGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim TH, Kang H, Hong JH et al (2011) Intraperitoneal and intravenous lidocaine for effective pain relief after laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 25:3183–3190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ram D, Sistla SC, Karthikeyan VS et al (2014) Comparison of intravenous and intraperitoneal lignocaine for pain relief following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A double-blind, randomized, clinical trial. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 28:1291–1297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yang SY, Kang H, Choi GJ et al (2014) Efficacy of intraperitoneal and intravenous lidocaine on pain relief after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Int Med Res 42:307–319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Samimi S, Taheri A, Tanha F (2015) Comparison between intraperitoneal and intravenous lidocaine for postoperative analgesia after elective abdominal hysterectomy, a double-blind placebo controlled study. J Fam Reprod Health 9:193–198Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Perniola A, Fant F, Magnuson A et al (2014) Postoperative pain after abdominal hysterectomy: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing continuous infusion vs patient-controlled intraperitoneal injection of local anaesthetic. Br J Anaes 112:328–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Murad AFM, Abosrie M, Alazeem E, Mostafa A (2016) Efficacy of intraperitoneal versus intravenous lidocaine for postcesarean pain relief. Evidence based womens health journal 6:144–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    De Clive-Lowe SG, Desmond J, North J (1958) Intravenous lignocaine anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 13(138–14):6Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kranke P, Jokinen J, Pace NL et al (2015) Continuous intravenous perioperative lidocaine infusion for postoperative pain and recovery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Koppert W, Weigand M, Neumann F et al (2004) Perioperative intravenous lidocaine has preventive effects on postoperative pain and morphine consumption after major abdominal surgery. Anesth Analg 98:1050–1055CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Zargar K et al (2011) Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic in colon resection—A double-blinded randomised controlled trial. Colorectal Dis 13:59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Soop M et al (2010) Intraperitoneal use of local anesthetic in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 17(5):637–656CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hamill JK, Rahiri JL, Hill AG (2017) Analgesic effect of intraperitoneal local anesthetic in surgery: an overview of systematic reviews. J Surg Res 212:167–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kahokehr A, Sammour T, Srinivasa S et al (2011) Metabolic response to abdominal surgery: the 2-wound model. Surgery 149:301–304CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Traub RJ, Sengupta JN, Gebhart GF (1996) Differential c-fos expression in the nucleus of the solitary tract and spinal cord following noxious gastric distention in the rat. Neuroscience 74:873–884CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Berthoud HR, Neuhuber WL (2000) Functional and chemical anatomy of the afferent vagal system. Auton Neurosci Basic Clin 85:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wiremu S. MacFater
    • 1
  • Weisi Xia
    • 1
  • Ahmed Barazanchi
    • 1
  • Bruce Su’a
    • 1
  • Darren Svirskis
    • 2
  • Andrew G. Hill
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, South Auckland Clinical CampusUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of Pharmacy, Grafton CampusUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations