Intravenous Local Anaesthetic Compared with Intraperitoneal Local Anaesthetic in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review
- 1 Downloads
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.
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.
- 16.(RevMan) RM. Review Manager (RevMan) (2004) In: Collaboration TC editor. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
- 19.Digitizer P (2015) Plot Digitizer In: sourceforge.net editor, sourceforge.netGoogle Scholar
- 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
- 26.De Clive-Lowe SG, Desmond J, North J (1958) Intravenous lignocaine anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 13(138–14):6Google Scholar