↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of Intravenous Lidocaine for Postoperative Analgesia Following Laparoscopic Surgery: A Meta‐Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgery, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
86 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy of Intravenous Lidocaine for Postoperative Analgesia Following Laparoscopic Surgery: A Meta‐Analysis
Published in
World Journal of Surgery, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00268-015-3105-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas T. Ventham, Ewan D. Kennedy, Richard R. Brady, Hugh M. Paterson, Doug Speake, Irwin Foo, Kenneth C. H. Fearon

Abstract

Intravenous (IV) lidocaine has analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of IV lidocaine in controlling postoperative pain following laparoscopic surgery. A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IV lidocaine versus placebo/routine treatment for postoperative analgesia following laparoscopic surgery. The primary outcome was opiate requirement at 24 h. Secondary outcomes included cumulative opiate requirement, numerical pain scores (2, 12, 24, 48 h at rest and on movement), recovery indices (nausea and vomiting, length of stay, time until diet resumption, first flatus and bowel movement) and side effects (cardiac/neurological toxicity). Subgroup analyses were performed according to operation type and to compare IV lidocaine with intraperitoneal lidocaine. Fourteen RCTs with 742 patients were included. IV lidocaine was associated with a small but significant reduction in opiate requirement at 24 h compared with placebo/routine care. IV lidocaine was associated with reduced cumulative opiate requirement, reduced pain scores at rest at 2, 12 and 24 h, reduced nausea and vomiting and a shorter time until resumption of diet. The length of stay did not differ between groups. There was a low incidence of IV lidocaine-associated toxicity. In subgroup analyses, there was no difference between IV and intraperitoneal lidocaine in the measured outcomes. IV lidocaine has a multidimensional effect on the quality of recovery. IV lidocaine was associated with lower opiate requirements, reduced nausea and vomiting and a shorter time until resumption of diet. Whilst IV lidocaine appears safe, the optimal treatment regimen remains unknown. Statistical heterogeneity was high.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 104 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 17 16%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Master 8 7%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 28 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 54%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 33 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2023.
All research outputs
#4,403,741
of 24,748,616 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#656
of 4,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,993
of 271,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#4
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,748,616 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 271,997 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.