CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Résumé de cet Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yoshikawa, T.
Right arrow Articles by Ogawa, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yoshikawa, T.
Right arrow Articles by Ogawa, R.
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia 48:538-544 (2001)
© Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society, 2001

Regional Anesthesia and Pain

Epidural anesthesia with lidocaine reduces propofol injection pain

[L'anesthésie péridurale avec lidocaïne réduit la douleur provoquée par l'injection de propofol]

Tatsusuke Yoshikawa, MD PhD*,{dagger},{ddagger}, Zen'ichiro Wajima, MD PhD{dagger}, Tetsuo Inoue , MD PhD{dagger}, Akira Ogura , MD PhD§ and Ryo Ogawa , MD PhD§

* From the Department of Anaesthesia, Hakujikai Memorial Hospital, Tokyo, the
{dagger} Department of Anaesthesia, Chiba Hokusoh Hospital, Chiba, the
{ddagger} Department of Anaesthesiology, Tokyo Jikeikai Medical School, Tokyo, and the
§ Department of Anaesthesiology, Main Hospital, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan.

Address correspondence to: Dr. T. Yoshikawa, 5-11-1 Shikahama, Adachi-ku, Tokyo 123-0864, Japan. Phone: +81-3-3899-1311, ext. 2116; Fax: +81-3-3855-2851; E-mail: FZN03121{at}nifty.ne.jp

Purpose: To determine whether epidural lidocaine reduces the severity of propofol injection pain compared with iv lidocaine.

Methods: A prospective, randomized double-blind clinical study was conducted in 120 female patients scheduled for elective gynecological laparotomy. A lumbar epidural catheter and an iv catheter placed in the cephalic vein of the non-dominant hand were used in all patients. Patients of the control group (Group C) were given epidural normal saline followed by iv normal saline then iv propofol. Patients of Group E were given epidural 2% lidocaine (0.08 mL•cm–1) followed by iv normal saline and then propofol. Patients of Group V were given epidural normal saline followed by iv 2% lidocaine (0.05 mL•kg–1) then propofol. Pain was scored as no pain=0, minimal pain=1, moderate pain=2, severe pain=3.

Results: The pain scores, in group E; 1 (0–2) and group V; 2 (0–2), were significantly lower than in group C; 2 (1–3); median (25th–75th percentile) (P <0.001). There was no difference in pain score between groups E and V. The plasma lidocaine concentration 15 min after epidural lidocaine was 2.74 ± 0.54 µg•mL–1, compared with 1.54 ± 0.31 µg•mL–1 at three minutes after iv lidocaine.

Conclusion: Epidural and iv lidocaine equally reduced the severity of propofol injection pain despite higher lidocaine plasma concentrations in epidurally administered lidocaine.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.