Ketorolac plus Lidocaine vs Lidocaine for pain relief following core needle soft tissue biopsy: A CONSORT-compliant double-blind randomized controlled study

Backgrounds:The main objective of this study was to compare the pain control efficacy of local administration of Lidocaine with or without the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, Ketorolac, and local conventional Lidocaine injection in core needle biopsy of the musculoskeletal tumor.Methods:The current study was a randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trial that included 128 patients with suspected musculoskeletal tumors. Patients were randomly assigned to either the Ketorolac plus Lidocaine (n = 64) or Lidocaine group (n = 64). The Ketorolac – Lidocaine combination syringe contained 30 mg Ketorolac and 2% Lidocaine – adrenaline dosage, and the Lidocaine syringe contained 2% Lidocaine – adrenaline dosage. The level of pain after core needle biopsy was evaluated for each patient at 1, 6, 12, 24, 48, and >48 hours by a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The mean VAS changes over time were compared between the Ketorolac plus Lidocaine and Lidocaine groups using a linear mixed model.Results:baseline information including mean age of patients in Lidocaine group (51.5 ± 19.4 years) and in Lidocaine – Ketorolac combination group (50.1 ± 18 years), diagnosis (malignant, benign, metastatic, infection), tumor location (upper and lower extremities, back), VAS score 1-hour post-operation (mild and moderate pain) were noted. The VAS score ratings were significantly lower in Lidocaine – Ketorolac combination group when compared to the Lidocaine group during the 1 to 24 hours post-operation time period.Conclusion:Patients receiving Lidocaine – Ketorolac combination dosage had significantly lower VAS scores, and these results confirm that local injection of Lidocaine – Ketorolac combination had a superior pain-controlling effect during the first 24 hours after the biopsy procedure in comparison to Lidocaine injection alone, as measured by VAS score scale.     

A randomized controlled trial: Comparison of one-per-mil tumescent technique and tourniquet in surgery for burn hand contracture in creating clear operative field and assessment of functional outcome

BackgroundThis study aims to compare the use of one-per-mil tumescent solution (a mixture of epinephrine and 0.2% lidocaine in a ratio of 1:1,000,000 in normal saline solution) and tourniquet to create clear operative fields and to evaluate the functional outcomes after post burn hand contracture surgery.MethodsThe subjects of this randomized controlled trial were divided into one-permil tumescent technique and tourniquet group for a similar surgical procedure. Three independent assessors evaluated the clarity of the operative fields through recorded videos for the first 15 min and the first 10-minute of each hour of the surgery. Functional outcome was evaluated at least three months postoperatively using total active and passive motion (TAM and TPM) of each digit. Malondialdehyde (MDA) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) were tested during baseline (5 min before the procedures), ischemia phase, and reperfusion phase (a phase when the blood flow returned to the tissue).Results35 subjects were included in this study: 17 in the tumescent group and 18 in the tourniquet group. We found a significant difference in the clarity of operative field between tumescent and tourniquet groups, 5 vs 35 bloodless operative fields, respectively (p < 0.05). TAM and TPM of each digit before surgery and 3 months postoperatively showed no significant difference between both groups (p > 0.05). Furthermore, we found no difference in MDA and TNF-α levels between both groups at their respective phases.ConclusionsThe use of one-per-mil tumescent technique does not replace tourniquet use to create bloodless operative fields in burned hand contracture surgery. However, the postoperative functional results were similar in both groups showing that tumescent technique can be used as an alternative to tourniquet without compromising outcomes. The MDA and TNF-α examinations do not provide conclusive outcomes regarding ischemia and reperfusion injury.     

Comparative study of the anaesthetic efficacy of 4% articaine versus 2% lidocaine with adrenaline during extraction of mandibular molars using an inferior alveolar nerve blocking technique

Various anaesthetic agents have been used in dentistry for the extraction of teeth. The most commonly used local anaesthetic agent is lidocaine hydrochloride. Recently, articaine hydrochloride came into existence because of its versatile properties and longer duration of action. Due to lack of study of effects of articaine on various systems, the present study is aimed to compare the anaesthetic efficacy of articaine and lidocaine with adrenaline during the extraction of mandibular molars. A total of 100 patients was randomly divided into two groups (50 each) and clinical variables such onset and duration of anaesthesia, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, pulse rate, and pain perception were recorded at different time intervals using a visual analogue scale. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 22.0. Mean and standard deviations, frequency distribution analysis, and the chi squared test were performed to calculate variables and a p< 0.05 was considered significant. Statistically significant differences were obtained regarding mean time of onset of anaesthesia (p< 0.001), mean duration of the anaesthetic effect (p< 0.001), and pain perception for the articaine group. No significant results were obtained for blood pressure, oxygen saturation, or pulse rate. During the deposition of articaine, patients reported less pain than with lidocaine. Articaine hydrochloride helped to achieve increased anaesthetic success in dental applications over lidocaine hydrochloride in terms of fast time of onset, longer duration, and less pain, all of which were attributed to its greater diffusion properties.     

不同麻醉方法人工流产镇痛效果比较

目的探讨联合用药用于人工流产镇痛效果。方法实验1组静脉缓慢推注丙泊酚2mg／kg，2％利多卡因5mL加阿托品1mg，配制混合药液6mL在暴露宫颈后将麻醉剂分点注射到宫颈周围。实验2组静脉缓慢推注丙泊酚2mg／kg。对照组静脉推注生理盐水5mL。所获数据采用）C。和t检验。结果实验l、2组显效率为100％，与对照组比较P〈0．01；实验1组宫颈完全松弛和较松弛达74．2％，实验2组为46．7％，两组比较有差异非常显著性（P〈0．01）。对照组为45．8％，实验2组与对照组比较差异无显著性（P〉0．05）。术中轻度呼吸抑制发生率、明显呼吸抑制发生率，实验2组显著高于实验1组（P〈0．05）。结论丙泊酚联合利多卡因、阿托品用于无痛人工流产，具有镇痛效果好、宫颈内口扩张充分、手术时间短、用药量小、费用低并可减少呼吸抑制及人工流产综合征的发生率，是安全有效的镇痛方法。     

p38MAPK信号通路在鞘内注射利多卡因诱发糖尿病神经病变大鼠脊髓神经元凋亡中的作用

目的探讨p38丝裂原活化蛋白激酶(p38MAPK)信号通路在鞘内注射利多卡因诱发糖尿病(DM)神经病变(DNP)大鼠脊髓神经元凋亡中的作用。方法健康成年雄性SD大鼠50只,随机取10只为对照组(C组),余40只大鼠高糖高脂饮食+小剂量链脲佐菌素(STZ)腹腔注射建立2型DM,之后继续喂养28d,得35只DNP大鼠。将C组大鼠和DNP大鼠均进行鞘内置管。将置管成功的25只DNP大鼠采用随机数字法分为三组:NS组8只,鞘内注射重比重利多卡因10μl 3d+0.9%NaCl 10μl 5d;DM组8只,鞘内注射重比重利多卡因10μl 3d+2%二甲亚砜(DMSO)10μl 5d;SB组9只,鞘内注射重比重利多卡因10μl 3d+SB203580(SB203580需溶解在DMSO溶剂中)10μg/10μl 5d。于腹腔注射STZ前(C组鞘内置管前28d,T1)、STZ后28d(C组鞘内置管前,T2)、STZ后34d(T3)、STZ后39d(T4)时测定大鼠后爪机械缩足反射阈值(MWT);测完MWT立即处死大鼠,取L4~5的脊髓组织,光镜下观察其病理学结果,采用TUNEL法检测脊髓神经元凋亡的情况,采用ELISA法检测p-p38MAPK水平。结果 T2、T3时NS、DM和SB组MWT均明显低于C组(P0.05)。T4时NS和DM组MWT明显低于C和SB组(P0.05)。NS和DM组脊髓神经元凋亡指数,脊髓p-p38MAPK水平明显高于C和SB组(P0.05)。HE染色光镜下见NS组及DM组大鼠脊髓组织结构模糊,出现轻度的水肿,同时神经元的细胞核间隙轻微增宽;C组脊髓组织无明显病理改变;SB组大鼠脊髓组织病理损伤较轻,几乎正常。结论鞘内注射重比重利多卡因诱发DNP大鼠脊髓神经元的凋亡可能与进一步激活p38MAPK信号通路有关,且应用p38MAPK抑制剂SB203580对其有保护作用。     

利多卡因过敏性休克伴呼吸循环骤停急救1例报告

报告1例6岁女孩在局麻注射利多卡因时,即刻发生过敏性休克伴呼吸循环骤停的抢救经过和体会。利多卡因过敏反应虽十分罕见,但可能发生速发型过敏性休克甚至呼吸循环骤停而致死。普鲁卡因过敏或过敏性体质者可改用利多卡因,但应先做皮试,并备好氧气和急救药品,以防不测。抢救成功的关键是及时正确的诊断和急救,首选药物是肾上腺素。     

利多卡因对小鼠短暂全脑缺血后学习记忆障碍和胆碱能系统损害的影响

目的:观察利多卡因对不同ApoE基因型小鼠短暂全脑缺血后学习记忆障碍和中枢胆碱能系统损害的影响.方法:健康雄性C57BL/6J野生型小鼠(C57小鼠)和ApoE基因敲除型小鼠(ApoE小鼠)各随机分为3组:C57对照组(假手术操作,不夹闭双侧颈总动脉)C57缺血组(夹闭双侧颈总动脉17 min,经腹腔给予生理盐水)C57利多卡因组(夹闭双侧颈总动脉17 min,经腹腔给予利多卡因)ApoE对照组(处理同C57对照组)ApoE缺血组(处理同C57缺血组)ApoE利多卡因组(处理同C57利多卡因组).术后恢复7 d,从第8天起进行Morris水迷宫测试,连续5 d.术后第12天水迷宫测试后断头处死大鼠,分离双侧大脑皮层和海马测定乙酰胆碱酯酶、胆碱乙酰基转移酶活性和M受体结合活性.结果:(1)潜伏期:各缺血组均明显长于同品系相应的对照组,C57利多卡因组还明显长于C57缺血组[测试第3天(74.1±32.7)s比(49.2±19.5)s],但ApoE利多卡因组明显短于ApoE缺血组[测试第3～5天分别为(40.7±27.7)s比(84.7±26.8)s,(31.2±19.2)s比(72.1±33.0)s,和(28.0±22.1)s比(60.8±26.9)s](P＜0.05或0.01).两品系间比较,ApoE缺血组明显长于C57缺血组,但ApoE利多卡因组明显短于C57利多卡因组(P＜0.05或0.01).(2)有效搜索策略百分比:各缺血组均明显低于同品系相应的对照组,C57利多卡因组还明显低于C57缺血组[测试第3～5天分别为(18.2±11.7)%比(41.7±17.7)%,(22.7±20.8)%比(55.6±20.8)%,和(29.6±27.0)%比(66.7±21.7)%],但ApoE利多卡因组明显高于ApoE缺血组[测试第3～5天分别为(41.7±25.8)%比(15.6±12.9)%,(58.3±20.4)%比(18.8±11.6)%,和(66.7±30.3)%比(28.1±20.9)%](P＜0.01).两品系间比较,ApoE缺血组明显低于C57缺血组,但ApoE利多卡因组明显高于C57利多卡因组(P＜0.01).(3)胆碱能系统指标:各缺血组明显低于同品系相应的对照组,C57利多卡因组还明显低于C57缺血组,但ApoE利多卡因组明显高于ApoE缺血组(P＜0.05或0.01).两品系间比较,ApoE利多卡因组明显高于C57利多卡因组(P＜0.05或0.01).结论:短暂全脑缺血导致小鼠明显的脑损害,表现为学习记忆功能障碍和中枢胆碱能系统功能损害;ApoE小鼠学习记忆功能障碍的程度较C57小鼠更重.利多卡因加重了短暂全脑缺血所导致的C57小鼠脑损害,但可减轻ApoE小鼠的脑损害程度.     

利多卡因对妇科腹腔镜手术患者术后早期自主神经和肠道运动功能的影响

目的 探讨利多卡因对妇科腹腔镜手术患者术后早期自主神经和肠道运动功能的影响。
方法 选择全麻下腹腔镜全子宫双附件切除术患者56例,年龄30～64岁,BMI 18～25 kg/m²,ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级。将患者随机分为两组：利多卡因组（L组）和对照组（C组）,每组28例。L组麻醉诱导时静脉推注利多卡因1.5 mg/kg,术中泵注利多卡因1.5 mg·kg^-1·h^-1至手术结束,C组给予等量生理盐水。两组麻醉诱导与维持方案相同。记录术前1 d、术后第1、2天心率变异性（HRV）指标,包括总功率对数值（LogTP）、低频功率标准化值（LFnu）、高频功率标准化值（HFnu）、低频与高频功率比值（LF/HF）、全部窦性RR间期的标准差（SDNN）及相邻RR间期差值均方根（RMSSD）。采用酶联免疫吸附法（ELISA）测定术前1 d、术后第1、2天血清IL-6浓度。记录术后第1、2天40项术后恢复质量（QoR-40）评分。记录术后首次肠鸣音、肛门排气、排便和耐受固体食物时间。
结果 与C组比较,L组术后第1天LogTP、HFnu、SDNN、RMSSD明显升高（P<0.05）,LFnu和LF/HF明显降低（P<0.05）,术后第1、2天IL-6浓度明显降低（P<0.05）,QoR-40恢复质量评分明显增高（P<0.05）,术后首次肠鸣音、肛门排气、排便和耐受固体食物时间明显缩短（P<0.05）。
结论 术中静脉输注利多卡因可降低妇科腹腔镜手术患者术后早期的交感神经兴奋性,保护副交感活性,促进术后早期肠道运动功能的恢复。     

不同剂量罗哌卡因联合利多卡因对腹股沟疝无张力修补术后麻醉效果及应激反应的影响

目的探讨不同剂量罗哌卡因联合利多卡因用于腹股沟疝无张力修补术,对患者术后应激反应的影响。 方法选择2020年2至10月内蒙古包钢医院收治的拟在局部麻醉下行腹股沟疝无张力修补手术患者80例,随机分为复合组和对照组,每组各40例。对照组给予0.25%罗哌卡因联合1%利多卡因进行麻醉,复合组给予0.75%罗哌卡因联合1%利多卡因进行麻醉。比较2组患者各时段应激反应指标[皮质醇、白细胞介素-6（IL-6）]水平、Ramsay镇静评分、疼痛视觉模拟（VAS）评分、术后患者苏醒状况与术中不良反应情况。 结果术后2组患者术前1 d（T0）时,术后2 h（T1）和术后4 h（T2）的VAS评分与治疗前相比呈下降趋势,术后各时间段复合组的VAS评分比对照组更低（P<0.05）;所有患者应激反应指标对比,T1时2组血清皮质醇、IL-6水平较T0时期增高,但复合组低于对照组（P<0.05）,在T2时间段2组患者应激反应指标水平比T1时间段下降,且复合组应激反应水平比对照组低（P<0.05）。与对照组相比,Ramsay镇静评分显著降低（P<0.05）。2组患者术后苏醒情况比较,复合组苏醒时间短于对照组（P<0.05）;术中不良反应发生率复合组（1/40）明显低于对照组（7/40）（P<0.05）。 结论0.75%罗哌卡因联合1%利多卡因对腹股沟疝术后的患者有显著的镇痛效果,可以降低炎症,不良反应少,有临床推广的意义。