TY - JOUR
T1 - Wound infiltration with lidocaine prolongs postoperative analgesia after haemorrhoidectomy with spinal anaesthesia
AU - Morisaki, Hiroshi
AU - Masuda, Junichi
AU - Fukushima, Kazuaki
AU - Iwao, Yasuhide
AU - Suzuki, Kazunori
AU - Matsushima, Makoto
PY - 1996/9/1
Y1 - 1996/9/1
N2 - Purpose: There are few clinical data examining whether sensitization of peripheral nerves contributes to postoperative pain when the entry of noxious impulses to the central nervous system is blocked. We hypothesized that wound infiltration with lidocaine would provide better postoperative analgesia than with normal saline following haemorrhoidectomy with spinal blockade. Methods: In a randomized, placebo-controlled blinded study, 168 adults undergoing haemorrhoidectomy were allocated to two groups. In Group L (n = 88) local infiltration was provided with lidocaine 1% and in Group S (n = 80) with normal saline. Following spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine 3%, the surgeon infiltrated 15 ml of either infiltration solution to the surgical area. Postoperative analgesia was obtained by continuous epidural administration of 90 mg eptazocine in normal saline for 48 hr. Supplemental analgesics were given on request. Postoperative pain control was assessed at rest and during coughing with a 10 cm VAS on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd postoperative days (POD). Results: The VAS scores at rest in Group L were lower than those in Group S throughout the postoperative period. During coughing, VAS scores in Group S were increased on the 3rd postoperative day, while those in Group L remained constant (4.42 ± 0.27 vs 3.14 ± 0.28, P < 0.05). Fewer patients in Group L than in Group S required supplemental analgesics. Conclusion: Preoperative lidocaine infiltration to the surgical area provided prolonged postoperative analgesia in patients receiving haemorrhoidectomy with spinal anaesthesia.
AB - Purpose: There are few clinical data examining whether sensitization of peripheral nerves contributes to postoperative pain when the entry of noxious impulses to the central nervous system is blocked. We hypothesized that wound infiltration with lidocaine would provide better postoperative analgesia than with normal saline following haemorrhoidectomy with spinal blockade. Methods: In a randomized, placebo-controlled blinded study, 168 adults undergoing haemorrhoidectomy were allocated to two groups. In Group L (n = 88) local infiltration was provided with lidocaine 1% and in Group S (n = 80) with normal saline. Following spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine 3%, the surgeon infiltrated 15 ml of either infiltration solution to the surgical area. Postoperative analgesia was obtained by continuous epidural administration of 90 mg eptazocine in normal saline for 48 hr. Supplemental analgesics were given on request. Postoperative pain control was assessed at rest and during coughing with a 10 cm VAS on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd postoperative days (POD). Results: The VAS scores at rest in Group L were lower than those in Group S throughout the postoperative period. During coughing, VAS scores in Group S were increased on the 3rd postoperative day, while those in Group L remained constant (4.42 ± 0.27 vs 3.14 ± 0.28, P < 0.05). Fewer patients in Group L than in Group S required supplemental analgesics. Conclusion: Preoperative lidocaine infiltration to the surgical area provided prolonged postoperative analgesia in patients receiving haemorrhoidectomy with spinal anaesthesia.
KW - Anaesthesia: ano-rectal
KW - Anaestheti techniques: spinal, epidural
KW - Anaesthetics, local: lidocaine
KW - Analgesia: postoperative
KW - Analgesics: eptazocine, loxoprofen
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029787028&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029787028&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 8874908
AN - SCOPUS:0029787028
VL - 43
SP - 914
EP - 918
JO - Canadian Anaesthetists Society Journal
JF - Canadian Anaesthetists Society Journal
SN - 0832-610X
IS - 9
ER -