Intravenous lidocaine does not reduce length of hospital stay following abdominal hysterectomy

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia

Volumn 57, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 759-766

  Bryson, Gregory L ^a   Charapov, Ilia ^a   Krolczyk, Gregory ^b   Taljaard, Monica ^c   Reid, Dennis ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^c OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LIDOCAINE; LOCAL ANESTHETIC AGENT; MORPHINE; NARCOTIC ANALGESIC AGENT;

ABDOMINAL HYSTERECTOMY; ADULT; ANESTHESIA INDUCTION; ANESTHETIC RECOVERY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIZZINESS; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG TOLERABILITY; DYSGEUSIA; FEMALE; GENERAL ANESTHESIA; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INTESTINE FUNCTION; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; TINNITUS; AGED; ANESTHESIA LEVEL; HYSTERECTOMY; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; ANALGESICS, OPIOID; ANESTHESIA, GENERAL; ANESTHETICS, LOCAL; CONSCIOUSNESS MONITORS; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTERECTOMY; INFUSIONS, INTRAVENOUS; INJECTIONS, INTRAVENOUS; LENGTH OF STAY; LIDOCAINE; MIDDLE AGED; MORPHINE; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 77955473625     PISSN: 0832610X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-010-9332-2     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. BK Philip PR Reese SP Burch 2002 The economic impact of opioids on postoperative pain management J Clin Anesth 14 354 364 10.1016/S0952-8180(02) 00372-0 12208440
2. E Marret M Rolin M Beaussier F Bonnet 2008 Meta-analysis of intravenous lidocaine and postoperative recovery after abdominal surgery Br J Surg 95 1331 1338 10.1002/bjs.6375 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1cnotVOnsw%3D%3D 18844267
3. D Moher KF Schulz DG Altman 2001 The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials Lancet 357 1191 1194 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MzisFehtQ%3D%3D 11323066 (Pubitemid 32378696)
4. TR Mendoza C Chen A Brugger, et al. 2004 The utility and validity of the modified brief pain inventory in a multiple-dose postoperative analgesic trial Clin J Pain 20 357 362 10.1097/00002508-200409000-00011 15322443 (Pubitemid 39108849)
5. PS Myles JO Hunt CE Nightingale, et al. 1999 Development and psychometric testing of a quality of recovery score after general anesthesia and surgery in adults Anesth Analg 88 83 90 10.1097/00000539-199901000-00016 1:STN:280:DyaK1M7htVelsA%3D%3D 9895071 (Pubitemid 29025152)
6. nd ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc; 2006.
7. F Chung 1995 Recovery pattern and home-readiness after ambulatory surgery Anesth Analg 80 896 902 10.1097/00000539-199505000-00008 1:STN:280: DyaK2M3ktlGjug%3D%3D 7726431
8. Y Zhang MJ Laster EI Eger II M Sharma JM Sonner 2007 Lidocaine, MK-801, and MAC Anesth Analg 104 1098 1102 10.1213/01.ane.0000260318.60504.a9 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXksVyqsbc%3D 17456658 (Pubitemid 46649927)
9. PS Hodgson SS Liu 2001 Epidural lidocaine decreases sevoflurane requirement for adequate depth of anesthesia as measured by the bispectral index monitor Anesthesiology 94 799 803 10.1097/00000542-200105000-00018 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXjvValtbg%3D 11388531
10. JF Antognini E Carstens 1998 Macroscopic sites of anesthetic action: brain versus spinal cord Toxicol Lett 100-101 51 58 10.1016/S0378-4274(98)00164- 7 1:CAS:528:DyaK1cXnsFWqurw%3D 10049180 (Pubitemid 29069127)