Anaesthesia · 2025
Intravenous lidocaine with propofol-based sedation for colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Barbosa Eduardo C, Aguirre Júlia M, Bertoldi Paulo F E, Santo Paula, Baraldo Stefano, Nau Angélica L, Meine Gilmara C
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Intravenous lidocaine is a promising complementary strategy for sedation during surgical procedures. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare intravenous lidocaine with placebo as an adjuvant to propofol-based sedation in patients undergoing colonoscopy.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases for randomised controlled trials comparing sedation with propofol and lidocaine vs. propofol and placebo in patients undergoing colonoscopy. The primary outcome was total propofol dose. A random-effects model was used to estimate the mean differences and risk ratios.
RESULTS: We included eight trials with 520 patients. Compared with placebo, intravenous lidocaine reduced propofol consumption during the procedure (mean difference (95%CI): -42.93 mg (-62.89 to -22.97)); shortened awakening time (mean difference (95%CI): -3.38 minutes (-5.92 to -0.84)); reduced post-procedural pain scores (mean difference (95%CI): -1.38 (-2.72 to -0.04)); and increased patient satisfaction scores (mean difference (95%CI): 0.50 (0.30 to 0.70)). There were no significant differences between the groups in procedure duration; endoscopist satisfaction scores; and risk of hypoxia or hypotension.
DISCUSSION: In patients undergoing colonoscopy, the addition of intravenous lidocaine to propofol-based sedation reduced propofol consumption, shortened awakening time, mitigated post-procedural pain and enhanced patient satisfaction compared with placebo. Although the findings are statistically significant, clinical relevance and cost-effectiveness are unclear.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases for randomised controlled trials comparing sedation with propofol and lidocaine vs. propofol and placebo in patients undergoing colonoscopy. The primary outcome was total propofol dose. A random-effects model was used to estimate the mean differences and risk ratios.
RESULTS: We included eight trials with 520 patients. Compared with placebo, intravenous lidocaine reduced propofol consumption during the procedure (mean difference (95%CI): -42.93 mg (-62.89 to -22.97)); shortened awakening time (mean difference (95%CI): -3.38 minutes (-5.92 to -0.84)); reduced post-procedural pain scores (mean difference (95%CI): -1.38 (-2.72 to -0.04)); and increased patient satisfaction scores (mean difference (95%CI): 0.50 (0.30 to 0.70)). There were no significant differences between the groups in procedure duration; endoscopist satisfaction scores; and risk of hypoxia or hypotension.
DISCUSSION: In patients undergoing colonoscopy, the addition of intravenous lidocaine to propofol-based sedation reduced propofol consumption, shortened awakening time, mitigated post-procedural pain and enhanced patient satisfaction compared with placebo. Although the findings are statistically significant, clinical relevance and cost-effectiveness are unclear.