Lidocaine attenuates TMZ resistance and inhibits cell migration by modulating the MET pathway in glioblastoma cells.

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most aggressive type of malignant brain tumor. Currently, the predominant clinical treatment is the combination of surgical resection with concurrent radiotherapy and chemotherapy, using temozolomide (TMZ) as the primary chemotherapy drug. Lidocaine, a widely used amide­based local anesthetic, has been found to have a significant anticancer effect. It has been reported that aberrant hepatocyte growth factor (HGF)/mesenchymal­epithelial transition factor (MET) signaling plays a role in the progression of brain tumors. However, it remains unclear whether lidocaine can regulate the MET pathway in GBM. In the present study, the clinical importance of the HGF/MET pathway was analyzed using bioinformatics. By establishing TMZ­resistant cell lines, the impact of combined treatment with lidocaine and TMZ was investigated. Additionally, the effects of lidocaine on cellular function were also examined and confirmed using knockdown techniques. The current findings revealed that the HGF/MET pathway played a key role in brain cancer, and its activation in GBM was associated with increased malignancy and poorer patient outcomes. Elevated HGF levels and activation of its receptor were found to be associated with TMZ resistance in GBM cells. Lidocaine effectively suppressed the HGF/MET pathway, thereby restoring TMZ sensitivity in TMZ­resistant cells. Furthermore, lidocaine also inhibited cell migration. Overall, these results indicated that inhibiting the HGF/MET pathway using lidocaine can enhance the sensitivity of GBM cells to TMZ and reduce cell migration, providing a potential basis for developing novel therapeutic strategies for GBM.

The Pharmacologic Management of Cardiac Arrest.

The effectiveness of pharmacologic management of cardiac arrest patients is widely debated; however, several studies published in the past 5 years have begun to clarify some of these issues. This article covers the current state of evidence for the effectiveness of the vasopressor epinephrine and the combination of vasopressin-steroids-epinephrine and antiarrhythmic medications amiodarone and lidocaine and reviews the role of other medications such as calcium, sodium bicarbonate, magnesium, and atropine in cardiac arrest care. We additionally review the role of ß-blockers for refractory pulseless ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation and thrombolytics in undifferentiated cardiac arrest and suspected fatal pulmonary embolism.

Effect of intravenous and topical laryngeal lidocaine on sore throat after extubation: a prospective randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to compare the effect of topical laryngeal lidocaine with intravenous lidocaine before endotracheal intubation on the incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat, hoarseness, and cough. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective randomized controlled study enrolled 144 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with endotracheal intubation. The patients were randomized to three groups and received 2% lidocaine by topical laryngeal spray (group T), intravenous 2% lidocaine (group I), and the equivalent volume of intravenous saline (group C) before intubation. The incidence and severity of sore throat, hoarseness, and cough reaction at 0.5, 1, 6, and 24 h after extubation were collected. RESULTS: The incidence of sore throat was significantly lower in group T than in groups I and C (6.4% vs. 37.2% and 86.7%, p < 0.001), respectively at 0.5 h after extubation, and it was significantly lower in group I than that in group C (37.2% vs. 86.7%, p < 0.001). Both the incidence of hoarseness and cough were significantly lower in group T than in group I and in group C (14.9% vs. 97.7% and 97.8%, p < 0.001, and 19.1% vs. 72.0% and 93.3%, p < 0.001), respectively. The severity of sore throat, hoarseness and cough in group T was significantly lower than that in group I and that in group C (p < 0.05), and it was significantly lower in group I than in group C (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both topical laryngeal lidocaine and intravenous lidocaine before intubation have positive effects on preventing sore throat. Topical laryngeal route was superior to intravenous route. Chictr.org.cn ID: ChiCTR2100042442.

Efficacy and Clinical Value of Commonly Used Ingredients in Pain Management Compounds: A Literature Review.

The need for continued improvement in pain management is growing. This review is aimed towards identifying the literature regarding clinical and therapeutic value of the commonly used ingredients in pain management compounds: lidocaine, tetracaine, ketoprofen, ketamine, and gabapentin. Prospectively, future studies should be conducted to identify the exact benefits and side effects of compounded pain management therapies, such that these compounds can be effectively utilized when deemed appropriate.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Analgesic Effects of Lidocaine Administered Intravenously or Intraperitoneally Post-Abdominal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Reducing postoperative pain is still a tremendous challenge for perioperative clinicians. Lidocaine is a local anesthetic that belongs to the amide class and has anti-inflammatory, anti-hyperalgesic, and analgesic effects. Extensive research has been conducted to determine the optimal route for its administration. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of perioperative intravenous lidocaine with that of intraperitoneal lidocaine on postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. STUDY DESIGN: EMBASE, PubMed, and The Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials published through December 2022 that compared patients receiving perioperative intravenous lidocaine with those receiving intraperitoneal lidocaine. The primary outcome measures included the pain score, as evaluated by the Visual Analog Scale, and opioid analgesia requirements. The secondary outcome measures were hospitalization length, gastrointestinal function recovery, etc. The data were acquired and recorded in electronic spreadsheets that had been designed for this purpose. METHODS: This systematic review's design was based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to examine the certainty of the evidence. Furthermore, we examined the dependability of the calculated (favorable) treatment effects through considerations of information size and modified significance thresholds (trial sequential analysis). RESULTS: Seven trials including 478 patients were included. Our meta-analysis demonstrates that compared with intravenous lidocaine, patients who received intraperitoneal lidocaine had lower pain scores at 4 hours (mean difference [MD] 1.40; 95% CI, 0.22 to 2.59); 12 hours (MD 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.30); and 24 hours (MD -0.12; 95% CI -0.40 to 0.17) postsurgery. However, no obvious difference in opioid consumption (P > 0.05) was found. In addition, the intraperitoneal lidocaine group had a longer postsurgery hospital stay than the intravenous lidocaine group (95%CI, -0.17 to -0.00; I2 = 0%). Intravenous lidocaine was more beneficial for achieving gastrointestinal return than intraperitoneal lidocaine (95% CI, -0.26 to -0.10; I2 = 2%). LIMITATIONS: The sample size of enrolled RCTs was small, which could potentially result in an overestimation or underestimation of the treatment effect in the collected data. There was high heterogeneity among the studies. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that post-abdominal surgery intraperitoneal lidocaine administration has a better analgesic effect than intravenous lidocaine, with a lower pain score. However, intravenous lidocaine is more beneficial for gastrointestinal recovery after abdominal surgery.

Efficacy of intraoperative systemic lidocaine on quality of recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Many clinical trials have demonstrated the benefits of intraoperative systemic lidocaine administration in major abdominal surgeries. We tested the hypothesis that systemic lidocaine is associated with an enhanced early quality of recovery in patients following laparoscopic colorectal resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly allocated 126 patients scheduled for laparoscopic colorectal surgery in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lidocaine (1.5 mg kg-1 bolus over 10 min, followed by continuous infusion at 2 mg kg-1 h-1 until the end of surgery) or identical volumes and rates of saline. The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery-15 score assessed 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes were areas under the pain numeric rating scale curve over time, 48-h morphine consumption, and adverse events. RESULTS: Compared with saline, systemic lidocaine improved the Quality of Recovery-15 score 24 h postoperatively, with a median difference of 4 (95% confidence interval: 1-6; p = 0.015). Similarly, the area under the pain numeric rating scale curve over 48 h at rest and on movement was reduced in the lidocaine group (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively). However, these differences were not clinically meaningful. Lidocaine infusion reduced the intraoperative remifentanil requirements but not postoperative 48-h morphine consumption (p < 0.001 and p = 0.34, respectively). Additionally, patients receiving lidocaine had a quicker and earlier return of bowel function, as indicated by a shorter time to first flatus (log-rank p < 0.001), yet ambulation time was similar between groups (log-rank test, p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, intraoperative systemic lidocaine resulted in statistically but not clinically significant improvements in quality of recovery (see Graphical Abstract).Trial registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; ChiCTR1900027635.

Systemic lidocaine failed to clinically improve the overall quality of recovery following laparoscopic colorectal resection.Systemic lidocaine reduced intraoperative remifentanil and time to first flatus but not postoperative 48-h morphine consumption.No differences emerged in patient-reported outcomes like opioid side effects, mobility, or satisfaction between groups postoperatively.

PROcedure-SPECific postoperative pain management guideline for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A systematic review with recommendations for postoperative pain management.

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in women and third most common in men. Laparoscopic resection has become the standard surgical technique worldwide given its notable benefits, mainly the shorter length of stay and less postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature on postoperative pain management following laparoscopic colorectal surgery and update previous procedure-specific pain management recommendations. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements. We also considered study quality, clinical relevance of trial design, and a comprehensive risk-benefit assessment of the analgesic intervention. We performed a literature search to identify randomised controlled studies (RCTs) published before January 2022. Seventy-two studies were included in the present analysis. Through the established PROSPECT process, we recommend basic analgesia (paracetamol for rectal surgery, and paracetamol with either a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific inhibitor for colonic surgery) and wound infiltration as first-line interventions. No consensus could be achieved either for the use of intrathecal morphine or intravenous lidocaine; no recommendation can be made for these interventions. However, intravenous lidocaine may be considered when basic analgesia cannot be provided.

The comparative effectiveness of combined hydrodilatation/corticosteroid procedure with two different quantities for adhesive capsulitis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of injecting various amounts of fluid into the shoulder joints for capsule distension in patients with adhesive capsulitis. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient clinic of a tertiary care centre. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-four patients with adhesive capsulitis underwent a baseline (time0), 6 weeks (time1), and 12 weeks (time2) follow-up after hydrodilitation. INTERVENTION: Group 1 (n = 42) received 20 ml of lidocaine, steroid, and saline hydrodilatation via posterior glenohumeral recess, while Group 2 (n = 42) received 10 ml of lidocaine, steroid, and saline hydrodilitation. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was the visual analogue scale for pain. The secondary outcomes were shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) and ROM of the shoulder. RESULTS: There was a significant reduce in VAS scores for pain, SPADI scores, and increased shoulder ROM in both groups over time; however, the group-by-time interactions for any of the outcomes between groups were not significant except VAS pain in motion. Post-hoc pairwise analysis of the marginal effect of time and group showed that the significant difference of VAS in motion is due to time effect: time1 vs time0 (95% CI -4.09 to -2.68), time2 vs time0 (-4.21 to -2.77), and time2 vs time1 (-0.83 to 0.63), without between-group difference: group 1 vs group 2 (-0.38 to 0.59). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests hydrodilatation achieved an optimal effect at time1 for patients with adhesive capsulitis in both groups, and adding more saline offers additional benefits in flexion and external roatation until time2.

Adhesive polydopamine-based photothermal hybrid hydrogel for on-demand lidocaine delivery, effective anti-bacteria, and prolonged local long-lasting analgesia.

Considering the astonishing prevalence of localized pain affecting billions of patients worldwide, the development of advanced analgesic formulations or delivery systems to achieve clinical applicability is of great significance. In this study, an integrated PDA-based LiH@PDA@Ag@PAA@Gelatin system was designed for sustained delivery of lidocaine hydrochloride (LiH). By optimizing the preparation process and formulation of the hydrogel, the hydrogel exhibited superior mechanical properties, reversibility, adhesion strength, and self-healing attributes. Moreover, PDA@Ag nanoparticles were evenly dispersed within the hydrogel, and the optimized PDA@Ag@PAA@Gelatin showed a higher photothermal conversion efficiency than that of pure PDA. Importantly, LiH@PDA@Ag@PAA@Gelatin could effectively capture and eradicate bacteria through the synergistic interaction between near-infrared (NIR), PDA, Ag and LiH. In vitro and in vivo tests demonstrated that LiH@PDA@Ag@PAA@Gelatin exhibited higher drug delivery efficiency compared to commercial lidocaine patches. By evaluating the mechanical pain withdrawal threshold of the spared nerve injury (SNI) model in rats, it was proven that LiH@PDA@Ag@PAA@Gelatin enhanced and prolonged the analgesic effect of LiH. Furthermore, LiH@PDA@Ag@PAA@Gelatin induced by NIR possessed excellent on-demand photothermal analgesic ability. Therefore, this study develops a convenient method for preparing localized analgesic hydrogel patches, providing an important step towards advancing PDA-based on-demand pain relief applications.

What is in the pipeline for new treatments for bladder pain syndrome/ interstitial cystitis?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Despite available treatments, many bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis (BPS/IC) patients continue to have poor quality of life. Thus, there is an urge for new therapies. Our manuscript aims to review papers about BPS/IC treatments published in the last 2 years. RECENT FINDINGS: During this period, several treatments were tested, most of them new and others combining treatments already used. Pentosan polysulfate, interleukin 1 antagonist, low energy shock wave, physical therapy, hypnosis, acupuncture, clorpactin, dimethyl sulfoxide and hyaluronic acid plus botulinum toxin-A showed positive results. ASP3652 and lidocaine-releasing intravesical systems failed to prove their efficacy. SUMMARY: Validation of these studies is arduous due to the broad spectre of BPS/IC phenotypes, small number of patients enrolled, distinct outcome measures and short-term follow-up. It is also important to highlight that some authors combined therapies, and others split central and peripheric phenotypes before treatment. Therefore, soon, phenotyping and combining therapies with a step-by-step approach will be needed in BPS/IC treatment.

The analgesic effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for acute and chronic persistent postsurgical pain in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women and tumour resection carries a high prevalence of chronic persistent postsurgical pain (CPSP). Perioperative i.v. lidocaine infusion has been proposed as protective against CPSP; however, evidence of its benefits is conflicting. This review evaluates the effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for breast cancer surgery. METHODS: Randomised trials comparing perioperative lidocaine infusions with parenteral analgesia in breast cancer surgery patients were sought. The two co-primary outcomes were the odds of CPSP at 3 and 6 months after operation. Secondary outcomes included rest pain at 1, 6, 12, and 24 h; analgesic consumption at 0-24 and 25-48 h; quality of recovery; opioid-related side-effects; and lidocaine infusion side-effects. Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) random effects modelling was used. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (1039 patients; lidocaine: 518, control: 521) were included. Compared with control, perioperative lidocaine infusion did not decrease the odds of developing CPSP at 3 and 6 months. Lidocaine infusion improved postoperative pain at 1 h by a mean difference (95% confidence interval) of -0.65 cm (-0.73 to -0.57 cm) (P<0.0001); however, this difference was not clinically important (1.1 cm threshold). Similarly, lidocaine infusion reduced oral morphine consumption by 7.06 mg (-13.19 to -0.93) (P=0.029) over the first 24 h only; however, this difference was not clinically important (30 mg threshold). The groups were not different for any of the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide moderate-quality evidence that perioperative lidocaine infusion does not reduce CPSP in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Routine use of lidocaine infusions for perioperative analgesia and CPSP prevention is not supported in this population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42023420888.

Pain Control during the Treatment of Primary Palmar Hyperhidrosis with Botulinum Toxin A by a Topical Application of Liposomal Lidocaine: Clinical Effectiveness.

Primary palmar hyperhidrosis (PPH) constitutes a debilitating condition that profoundly impacts the social, functional, and occupational aspects of individuals. The intradermal administration of botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) stands as an established therapeutic approach for PPH, albeit one frequently accompanied by considerable pain, posing challenges for patient tolerance. Our study aimed to assess the efficacy of combining cryoanalgesia spray (CA) with topical anesthesia utilizing a cream containing liposomal lidocaine at a concentration of 40 mg/g, with the objective of mitigating the pain associated with intradermal BoNT-A injection for PPH treatment. Nineteen participants, aged ≥18 years and afflicted with severe PPH, were enrolled in a double-blind randomized vehicle-controlled trial. Patient-perceived pain during the procedure was quantified using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Statistical analysis was applied to the collected data. The combination of CA and the topical application of liposomal lidocaine during BoNT-A treatment for PPH resulted in diminished pain compared to CA alone and the combination of CA with the application of a basic cream. Topical anesthesia through the application of a liposomal lidocaine-containing cream emerged as a facile, secure, and efficacious approach for alleviating the pain associated with intradermal BoNT-A injection in PPH treatment. Furthermore, it demonstrated compatibility with CA, thereby offering a comprehensive strategy for pain management during BoNT-A administration.

Efficacy of Buzzy Device Versus EMLA Cream for Reducing Pain During Needle-Related Procedures in Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Several pain management tools exist but with limitations in their efficacy or applicability. The EMLA (eutectic mixture of local anesthetics) cream is currently used for pain relief for needle-related procedures; however, it needs a minimum of 30 to 45 minutes to be effective. The Buzzy is a device that generates vibrations with cold leading to quicker pain relief. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of the Buzzy device in pain and anxiety reduction compared with EMLA cream in children requiring intravenous cannulation or venepuncture. METHODS: This was a randomized clinical trial comparing pain and anxiety reduction by Buzzy device with the standard care (EMLA cream) in children aged 2 to 14 years who required blood extraction or intravenous cannulation based on their clinical needs. Eligible patients were randomized to either Buzzy device as the intervention or EMLA cream as the control. The outcome measures were the degree of pain scores and anxiety ratings at different stages of the needle-related procedures. RESULTS: A total of 300 patients with a mean age of 6.5 ± 3.1 years were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were similar between the Buzzy device and EMLA cream groups. The observed pain scores by research nurses and a parent were significantly lower in the EMLA group compared with the Buzzy device group; however, the pain scores by the self-assessment scale were not statistically significant with mean difference of -0.332, 95% confidence interval, -0.635 to -0.028 ( P = 0.062). The level of anxiety was significantly lower in EMLA compared with Buzzy device ( P = 0. 0.0001). Both staff and parents' satisfaction, success rate of cannulation, type of blood tests, and comment on the physician on the results were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pain and anxiety relief using the Buzzy device is not as effective as EMLA cream in children requiring venepuncture. However, rapid onset of action of the Buzzy device is valuable in decreasing waiting time in a busy emergency department. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT05354739.

Multifunctional electrospun polycaprolactone/chitosan/hEGF/lidocaine nanofibers for the treatment of 2 stage pressure ulcers.

In this study, a multifunctional nanofiber dressing that can promote antibacterial, analgesic and healing was prepared by electrospinning technology. Hydrophobic polycaprolactone (PCL)/chitosan (CS)/lidocaine hydrochloride (LID) and epidermal growth factor (EGF) were used as scaffold materials and dissolved in trifluoroacetic acid to prepare spinning solution. The morphology of PCEL dressing was observed by scanning electron microscopy. The fiber structure was dense and the average diameter was 297.0 nm. The water absorption capacity test and water contact angle measurement showed that the fiber had good water absorption and hydrophilicity (1302 %, 139.258°). Drug release was 84 % within 60 h. In the results of antibacterial experiment, the dressing showed certain antibacterial properties. The results of cell experiments show that the dressing can promote cell proliferation. In addition, coagulation experiments showed that the dressing could quickly coagulate the blood within 4 min. In addition, PCEL dressing promoted collagen deposition and vascularization through animal models of pressure sores. Therefore, multifunctional dressing can be used as an ideal auxiliary means for the treatment of pressure sores, and it is a promising alternative to chronic wound healing.

Effect of intravenous lidocaine on outcomes in patients receiving propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures (GEPs) are frequently employed for the diagnosis and treatment of various gastrointestinal ailments. While propofol sedation is widely used during these procedures, there is a concern regarding its potential negative effects. Intravenous (IV) lidocaine has been suggested as an add-on to propofol sedation for GEPs, but current evidence on its efficiency and safety is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of IV lidocaine on outcomes in patients receiving propofol during GEPs. METHODS: Electronic databases were screened for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published up to 31 March 2023, investigating the effectiveness of intravenous lidocaine addition to propofol sedation during GEPs. RESULTS: A total of 12 RCTs involving 712 patients that received IV lidocaine and propofol for GEF and 719 patients that received propofol were analyzed. Adding IV lidocaine to propofol sedation led to significant reduction in pain after the procedure (standardized mean difference (SMD) = - 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI]; - 1.51 to - 0.32), decreased propofol usage (SMD = - 0.89; 95% CI, - 1.31 to - 0.48), lower recovery time (SMD = - 0.95 min; 95% CI, - 1.48 to - 0.43), and decreased pain score (SMD = - 0.91; 95% CI, - 1.51 to - 0.32). The overall rate of adverse events was markedly less in the lidocaine group than in the control group (RR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: Our results show that IV lidocaine improves patient outcomes by reducing post-procedural pain, decreasing propofol usage, shortening recovery time, and lowering pain scores. This study provides compelling evidence supporting the use of intravenous lidocaine as an adjunct to propofol sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures. However, further research is necessary to optimize the use of lidocaine and fully understand its long-term effects.

Needle-free electronically-controlled jet injector treatment with bleomycin and lidocaine is effective and well-tolerated in patients with recalcitrant keloids.

OBJECTIVES: The treatment of recalcitrant keloids is challenging. Although intralesional bleomycin using conventional needle injectors (CNI) is effective, it has important drawbacks, such as the need for repetitive and painful injections. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, tolerability and patient satisfaction of intralesional bleomycin with lidocaine administered with a needle-free electronically-controlled pneumatic jet-injector (EPI) in recalcitrant keloids. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with recalcitrant keloids who had received three intralesional EPI-assisted treatments with bleomycin and lidocaine. Effectiveness was assessed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) at baseline and four to six weeks after the third treatment. Additionally, treatment related pain scores numeric rating scale, adverse effects, patient satisfaction and Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) were assessed. RESULTS: Fifteen patients with a total of >148 recalcitrant keloids were included. The median total POSAS physician- and patient-scores were respectively 40 and 41 at baseline, and reduced with respectively 7 and 6-points at follow-up ( p < 0.001; p < 0.001). The median pain scores during EPI-assisted injections were significantly lower compared to CNI-assistant injections, (2.5 vs. 7.0, respectively ( p < 0.001)). Adverse effects were mild. Overall, patients were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the treatments (14/15, 93.3%). The GAIS was "very improved" in one patient, "improved" in nine patients and "unaltered" in four patients. CONCLUSIONS: EPI-assisted treatment with bleomycin and lidocaine is an effective, well tolerated, patient-friendly alternative for CNI in patients with recalcitrant keloid scars. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm our findings and improve the clinical management of recalcitrant keloids.