Background: In craniotomy tumor removal, brain relaxation after dura opening is essential. Lidocaine is known to have analgesic and antiinflammatory effects. It is excellent in decreasing cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen, cerebral blood flow, and cerebral blood volume; and can potentially reduce intracranial pressure, resulting in exceptional brain relaxation after dura opening. However, no study has examined continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion on brain relaxation, intraoperative opioid consumption and surgeon's satisfaction in adult patients undergoing craniotomy tumor removal.Methods: A total of 60 subjects scheduled for craniotomy tumor removal were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized controlled trial with consecutive sampling. Patients received either an intravenous bolus of lidocaine (2%) 1.5 mg/kg before induction followed by 2 mg/kg/h continuous infusion up to skin closure (lidocaine group) or placebo with similar volume (NaCl 0.9%). Neurosurgeons evaluated brain relaxation and surgeon's satisfaction with a 4-point scale, total intraoperative opioid consumption was recorded in μg and μg/kg/min.Results: All sixty subjects were included in the study. Lidocaine group showed better brain relaxation after dura opening (96.7% vs 70%; lidocaine vs placebo, P < .006), less intraoperative fentanyl consumption (369.2 μg vs 773.0 μg; P < .001, .0107 vs .0241 μg/kg/min; lidocaine vs placebo, P < .001). Higher surgeon's satisfaction was found in lidocaine group (96.7% vs 70%, P = .006). No side effects were observed during this study.Conclusions: Continuous lidocaine intravenous infusion improves brain relaxation after dura opening, and decreases intraoperative opioid consumption, with good surgeon satisfaction in adult patients undergoing craniotomy tumor removal.Abbreviations: CBF = cerebral blood flow, CMRgluc = cerebral metabolic rate for glucose, CMRO 2 = cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen, ICP = intracranial pressure, PMNs = polymorphonuclear cells.
Objective: The purpose of this study compared the outcome of PCNL under general and spinal anesthesia for the outcome. Material & Methods: PCNL had been performed from 2000 until 2011 with total 760 PCNL divided into 220 PCNL using general anesthesia (Group A) and the remaining 540 PCNL using spinal anesthesia (Group B) The data of both groups were evaluated with Chi square test, and Mann-Whitney test. Result: Stone free rate in Group A was 71.37% similar with Group B 72.97% (p > 0.05). Spinal anesthesia was used more often in patient who had previous surgery 65.5% compared with general anesthesia 36.82% (p < 0.05). The average surgery duration in Group A was longer than group B (77.10 ± 35.59 minutes vs 68.42 ± 30.55 minutes) (p < 0.05). The average length of hospital stay in Group B was shorter than Group A (3.90 ± 2.72 days vs 5.47 ± 4.25 days) (p < 0.05). There was no difference between Group A and Group B in complication and the needs of tranfusion. Conclusion: PCNL under spinal anesthsia was feasible and safe even better in the shorter surgery duration and the length of hospital stay.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.