目的 比较预注射利多卡因和局部加温缓解罗库溴铵注射痛效果。 方法 选取2011年3月－8月择期行腹腔镜下胆囊切除术的150例患者，按照完全随机的方法分为利多卡因组（L组）、局部加温组（W组）、对照组（C组）,每组各50例患者。W组患者在留置针部位用Bair Hugger以40 °C加温1 min；L组患者用橡胶止血带在静脉近端加压直至静脉输液停止走行，推注1%利多卡因2 mL，1 min后松开止血带。随后3组患者均在2 s内静脉推注1 mL罗库溴铵注射液（含罗库溴铵10 mg）。观察在注射罗库溴铵前预先注射利多卡因及局部加温缓解注射痛的效果。 结果 罗库溴铵注射痛的发生率在W组、L组、C组中分别为62%、34%、82%。C组的疼痛发生率最高（P＜0.05）；W组的疼痛率高于L组（P＜0.05）；与W、L组相比，C组的重度疼痛率最高（P＜0.05）；L组的中、重度疼痛率低于W组（P＜0.05）。 结论 预注射利多卡因和局部加温均能有效缓解罗库溴铵引起的注射痛，预注射利多卡因对于缓解罗库溴铵引起的注射痛更为有效。
目的:比较复方利多卡因和盐酸利多卡因的麻醉效果。方法:将 200 例口腔局麻的患者随机分为试验组和对照组,试验组应用复方利多卡因,对照组应用盐酸利多卡因。结果: 复方利多卡因的麻醉效果及时间明显优于盐酸利多卡因,两者结果在统计学上有显著性差异(Plt;0 01)。结论: 复方利多卡因具有显效时间快、作用时间长、止痛效果好的特点,特别是口腔科术后长效镇痛效果明显,值得推广应用。
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of intranasal lidocaine spray before nasogastric tube insertion. MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, WanFang Data, VIP, CBM and CNKI databases concerning randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the efficacy and safety of intranasal lidocaine spray before nasogastric tube insertion from their inception to January 2014. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality of included studies. Meta-analysis was then conducted using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsSix RCTs involving 384 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the lidocaine group and the saline group in pain and discomfort scores (MD=-25.35, 95%CI -30.37 to -24.33) and first successful insertion rate (RR=1.38, 95%CI 1.21 to 1.57). ConclusionIntranasal lidocaine spray before nasogastric tube insertion could reduce patient pain and discomforts related to the procedure, and improve the first successful insertion rate.
目的:比较芬太尼与利多卡因宫旁阻滞麻醉在人工流产术中的疗效。方法:选择我院2009年3月~2009年5月门诊终止妊娠早孕妇女100例,分为两组。芬太尼组50例,利多卡因组50例。比较两组宫旁阻滞麻醉镇痛效果及人流综合征发生率。结果:芬太尼组的镇痛效果明显优于利多卡因组,人流综合征的发生率明显低于利多卡因组。结论:芬太尼宫旁阻滞麻醉具有镇痛效果明显，人流综合征发生率低等优点，优于利多卡因麻醉效果。
Objective To systematically review the effects of lidocaine for preventing pain on injection of propofol. Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2012), PubMed, MEDLINE, Ovid, HighWire, EMbase, CBM and CNKI were searched electronically to collect literature published from January, 1985 to December, 2012. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were indentified about lidocaine for preventing injection pain of propofol. References of the included studies were also retrieved. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assess the quality of the included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. Results Fifteen trials involved 1 332 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis indicated that, adding lidocaine into propofol lowered the incidence of pain on injection compared with blank control, with a significant difference (RR=0.36, 95%CI 0.30 to 0.44, Plt;0.000 01); using different doses of lidocaine before injection lowered the incidence of pain on injection compared with blank control, with a significant difference (RR=0.59, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.75, Plt;0.000 1); using different doses of lidocaine after venous occlusion lowered the incidence of pain on injection compared with blank control, with a significant difference (RR=0.44, 95%CI 0.37 to 0.52, Plt;0.000 01). Conclusion Lidocaine could reduce the pain on injection of propofol. Using lidocaine 40 mg after venous occlusion is a relatively effective method to lower the incidence of pain on injection which is more suitable for outpatient who receive intravenous anesthesia without preoperation medication.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy of lidocaine injected prior to tracheal extubation in preventing hemodynamic responses to tracheal extubation in general anesthesia.MethodsPubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy of lidocaine administrated prior to extubation in preventing hemodynamic responses to tracheal extubation in patients undergoing general anesthesia from inception to October, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 13.0 software.ResultsA total of 10 RCTs involving 525 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with control group, lidocaine could reduce mean arterial pressure in 5 min after extubation (MD=–5.10, 95%CI –9.41 to –0.79, P=0.02), weaken the increase in systolic blood pressure caused by extubation from the moment before extubation to 5 minutes after extubation (before extubation: MD=–7.22, 95%CI –10.34 to –4.11, P<0.000 01; at extubation: MD=–14.02, 95%CI –19.42 to –8.62, P<0.000 01; 1 minutes after extubation: MD=–15.82, 95%CI –22.20 to –9.45, P<0.000 01; 3 minutes after extubation: MD=–12.55, 95%CI –20.36 to –4.74, P=0.002; and 5 minutes after extubation: MD=–12.05, 95%CI –20.35 to –3.74, P=0.004), and weakened extubation-induced increase in diastolic blood pressure at extubation (MD=–9.71, 95%CI –16.57 to –2.86, P=0.005). In addition, lidocaine inhibited heart rate in all time points except the moment of before and at 10 minutes after extubation.ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that lidocaine can inhibit the increase in blood pressure and heart rate caused by extubation at certain times. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify above conclusions.
目的 研究利多卡因对海马的神经毒性是否会对大鼠空间学习记忆能力产生影响，并探讨大鼠空间学习能力的变化与海马CA3区锥体细胞数目的相关性。 方法 将成年Wistar雄性大鼠随机分为基础值组（n=7）和利多卡因惊厥组（n=40）。基础值组大鼠静脉给予生理盐水后使用Y迷宫测定大鼠的空间学习能力。利多卡因惊厥组大鼠尾静脉持续输注利多卡因造成惊厥，待大鼠恢复正常运动以后放入鼠笼重新饲养。并于惊厥后第1、3、5、7天从中随机抓取大鼠测试其空间学习能力以及组织学改变。根据对应天数将利多卡因惊厥组的40只大鼠随机细分为Day-1、Day-3、Day-5、Day-7亚组，每亚组10只。所有大鼠在测定空间学习能力之后立即处死，取出大脑并做石蜡包埋，冠状面切片后进行组织学检测，显微镜下评估海马CA3区锥体细胞状态。 结果 ① 基础值组和Day-1、Day-3、Day-5、Day-7亚组大鼠的Y迷宫穿梭次数分别为（25.2 ± 3.7）、（27.1 ± 8.1）、（36.9 ± 9.9）、（38.7 ± 10.6）、（40.6 ± 16.3）次，除Day-1亚组与基础值组比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）外，其余各亚组与基础值组差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；② 与基础值组单位面积（10.3 ± 4.5）个（异常锥体）细胞比较，利多卡因惊厥组大鼠海马CA3区异常锥体细胞数增加，Day-1、Day-3、Day-5、Day-7亚组计数值分别为13.0 ± 7.2、15.6 ± 5.0、19.6 ± 8.1、18.1 ± 5.1，且与大鼠Y迷宫穿梭次数呈正相关（r=0.711，P＜0.05）。 结论 利多卡因引起的惊厥使成年大鼠海马依赖性空间学习能力下降，利多卡因的神经毒性引起的海马异常锥体细胞增多可能是造成这一现象的一种原因。
Objective To evaluate the effects of midazolam intravenous drip combined with lidocaine via nebulization on patients during mechanical ventilation in intensive care unit ( ICU) . Methods 60 thoracic patients required postoperative mechanical ventilation in ICUwere randomized into 2 groups. The patients in therapeutic group received lidocaine 1 mg/kg via nebulization and midazolam intravenous drip 0. 1 mg·kg- 1·h- 1 . The patients in control group received 0. 9% NaCl 1 mg/kg via nebulization andmidazolam0. 1 mg·kg- 1 ·h- 1 . According to the scale of Ramsay, the additional midazolam and fentanyl were injected to maintain sedation and inhibit cough in both groups. During ventilation, calm score, the number and the severity of cough, the mean arterial pressure ( MAP) , heart rate ( HR) , and the consumption of midazolam and fentanyl were record. Results The number and severity of cough, the scale of MAP and HR in the therapeutic group were all significant lower than those in the control group ( P lt; 0. 05) . Theconsumption of midazolam and fentanyl in the therapeutic group were also significantly lower than that in the control group ( P lt; 0. 05) .Conclusion Midazolam intravenous drip combined with lidocaine via nebulization can reduce the side effects and requirement of sedative and opioids drug in ICU patients undergoing mechanical ventilation.