Effect of intraoperative paravertebral or intravenous lidocaine versus control during lung resection surgery on postoperative complications: A randomized controlled trial

4Citations
Citations of this article
75Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Use of minimally invasive surgical techniques for lung resection surgery (LRS), such as video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS), has increased in recent years. However, there is little information about the best anesthetic technique in this context. This surgical approach is associated with a lower intensity of postoperative pain, and its use has been proposed in programs for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). This study compares the severity of postoperative complications in patients undergoing LRS who have received lidocaine intraoperatively either intravenously or via paravertebral administration versus saline. Methods/design: We will conduct a single-center randomized controlled trial involving 153 patients undergoing LRS through a thoracoscopic approach. The patients will be randomly assigned to one of the following study groups: intravenous lidocaine with more paravertebral thoracic (PVT) saline, PVT lidocaine with more intravenous saline, or intravenous remifentanil with more PVT saline. The primary outcome will be the comparison of the postoperative course through Clavien-Dindo classification. Furthermore, we will compare the perioperative pulmonary and systemic inflammatory response by monitoring biomarkers in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and blood, as well as postoperative analgesic consumption between the three groups of patients. We will use an ANOVA to compare quantitative variables and a chi-squared test to compare qualitative variables. Discussion: The development of less invasive surgical techniques means that anesthesiologists must adapt their perioperative management protocols and look for anesthetic techniques that provide good analgesic quality and allow rapid rehabilitation of the patient, as proposed in the ERAS protocols. The administration of a continuous infusion of intravenous lidocaine has proven to be useful and safe for the management of other types of surgery, as demonstrated in colorectal cancer. We want to know whether the continuous administration of lidocaine by a paravertebral route can be substituted with the intravenous administration of this local anesthetic in a safe and effective way while avoiding the risks inherent in the use of regional anesthetic techniques. In this way, this technique could be used in a safe and effective way in ERAS programs for pulmonary resection. Trial registration: EudraCT, 2016-004271-52; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03905837. Protocol number IGGFGG-2016 version 4.0, 27th April 2017.

References Powered by Scopus

Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey

25713Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Acute Kidney Injury Network: Report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury

5823Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Prediction of postoperative pulmonary complications in a population-based surgical cohort

982Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Local Anesthetic Lidocaine and Cancer: Insight Into Tumor Progression and Recurrence

32Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Regional anesthesia and acute perioperative pain management in thoracic surgery: a narrative review

24Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Local anesthetics and recurrence after cancer surgerywhat’s new? A narrative review

18Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

De La Gala, F., Piñeiro, P., Reyes, A., Simón, C., Vara, E., Rancan, L., … Garutti, I. (2019). Effect of intraoperative paravertebral or intravenous lidocaine versus control during lung resection surgery on postoperative complications: A randomized controlled trial. Trials, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3677-9

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 10

45%

Researcher 6

27%

Lecturer / Post doc 4

18%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Nursing and Health Professions 12

43%

Medicine and Dentistry 12

43%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 2

7%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 2

7%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free