Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been associated with moderate to severe intensity pain, especially in the early postoperative period. Among pain modalities, the transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block has favorable results and fewer associated adverse effects. Current evidence also reports that intravenous lidocaine infusion is effective in reducing acute postoperative pain and decreases overall opioid requirement. This study aimed to compare intravenous lidocaine infusion and bilateral subcostal TAP block for postoperative analgesia following laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: Thirty patients were randomly classified into the control, lidocaine, and TAP block groups. Intravenous lidocaine infusion was used in the lidocaine arm intraoperatively, while bilateral subcostal TAP block was placed in the TAP block arm as an intervention. The primary outcome was 24 h average pain score. Secondary outcomes included rescue analgesic consumption, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and patient satisfaction. Results: Comparative analysis between groups showed that the 24 h mean pain score on the visual analog scale score was significantly decreased in the lidocaine group than the control group (mean difference with 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.47 (1.94, 3.00); P < 0.001). Furthermore, the mean pain score was significantly decreased in the lidocaine group than in the TAP block group (mean difference with 95% CI, 1.14 (0.56, 1.72); P < 0.001). Conclusions Intravenous lidocaine infusion is a superior modality for postoperative pain management in laparoscopic cholecystectomy than TAP block or routine management. Lidocaine also helped decrease rescue analgesic consumption and achieved better patient satisfaction.

BACKGROUND: Spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine, typically used for elective and emergency cesarean section, is associated with a significant incidence of hypotension resulting from sympathetic blockade. A variety of dosing regimens have been used to administer spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. The objective of this study was to compare the incidence of hypotension following two different fixed dosing regimens. METHODS: This was a randomized double-blind clinical trial with a two-sided design, 5% significance level and 80% power. After approval of the hospital ethics review committee, 60 patients were divided randomly into two groups. In one group, the local anesthetic dose was adjusted according to height and weight, and in the other, the dose was adjusted according to height only. RESULTS: Sixty women with a singleton pregnancy were included. Of the factors that could affect dose and blood pressure, including age, weight, height, and dose, only height differed between the groups. Mean heart rate was similar between the groups. Hypotension was significantly more frequent with dosage based on height alone than with two-factor dose calculation (56.7% vs. 26.7%; P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Adjusting the dose of isobaric bupivacaine to a patient's height and weight provides adequate anesthesia for elective cesarean section and is associated with a decreased incidence and severity of maternal hypotension and less use of ephedrine.
Advisory Committees ; Anesthesia ; Anesthesia, Spinal* ; Anesthetics, Local ; Blood Pressure ; Body Height ; Body Weight ; Bupivacaine ; Cesarean Section* ; Emergencies ; Ephedrine ; Ethics, Institutional ; Female ; Heart Rate ; Humans ; Hypotension ; Incidence ; Pregnancy