The effectiveness and outcomes of epidural analgesia in patients undergoing open liver resection: a propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Open liver resection necessitates a substantial upper abdominal inverted-L incision, resulting in severe pain and compromising patient recovery. Despite the efficacy of epidural analgesia in providing adequate postoperative analgesia, the potential epidural-related adverse effects should be carefully considered. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of continuous epidural analgesia and intravenous analgesia in open liver resection. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted, collecting data from patients who underwent open liver resection between 2007 and 2017. Propensity score matching was implemented to mitigate confounding variables, with patients being matched in a 1:1 ratio based on propensity scores. The primary outcome was the comparison of postoperative morphine consumption at 24, 48, and 72 hours between the two groups. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, postoperative outcomes, and epidural-related adverse effects. RESULTS: A total of 612 patients were included, and after matching, there were 204 patients in each group. Opioid consumption at 24, 48, and 72 hours postoperatively was statistically lower in the epidural analgesia group compared to the intravenous analgesia group (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in pain scores (p = 0.422). Additionally, perioperative hypotension requiring treatment, as well as nausea and vomiting, were significantly higher in the epidural analgesia group compared to the intravenous analgesia group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Epidural analgesia is superior to intravenous morphine in terms of reducing postoperative opioid consumption within the initial 72 h after open liver resection. Nevertheless, perioperative hypotension, which necessitates management, should be approached with consideration and vigilance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the Clinical Trials Registry at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ , NCT number: NCT06301932.

Efficacy of intravenous versus intraperitoneal lidocaine for postoperative analgesia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become the gold standard for gallbladder removal due to the low degree of invasiveness. However, postoperative pain still persists. Local anesthetics provide analgesia, reduce opioid consumption, and accelerate the return of bowel activity with a rare incidence of toxicity. However, it is still inconclusive to verify the more superior route of administration. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine infusion, intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation, and placebo in reducing postoperative analgesia. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, the participants were randomized into three groups; intravenous lidocaine infusion (IV group), intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation (IP group), and control. The primary outcome was opioid consumption and secondary outcomes were side effects and recovery profiles. RESULTS: Opioid consumption at 2, 4, and 6 postoperative hours was statistically lower in IV group compared to the IP and control group (P<0.05). VAS for abdominal pain (VAS(abd) at 6, 12, and 24 hours were reduced in both IV and IP groups compared to the control group. However, VAS at incision site (VAS(inc) were not different amongst all three groups. Number of patients who met the discharge criteria within six hours after surgery was significantly higher in the IV group (P=0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous lidocaine is superior to intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation and placebo in reducing postoperative analgesic requirement and visceral pain within the first six hours. Intravenous infusion is a simple and reliable method for reducing abdominal pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.