Effects of Intravenous Local Anesthetic on Bowel Function After Colectomy
NCT ID: NCT00600158
Last Updated: 2008-01-24
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE3
45 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2005-04-30
2006-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Local Anaesthesia Used During Fast-track Colonic Surgery: Evaluation of Bupivacaine and Levobupivacaine in Practice
NCT01105442
Investigation of the Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion on Postoperative Pain Treatment and Bowel Function in Robotic Bowel Surgery
NCT03044808
Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion in the Management of Post-operative Pain in Colorectal Patients
NCT01836614
Local Anesthetics on Postsurgical Analgesia Following Posterior Colporrhaphy
NCT04032327
Intravenous Lidocaine and Acute Rehabilitation
NCT00330941
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Postoperative ileus is largely inflammatory in origin, and appears to be reduced when surgical techniques (e.g. minimally invasive approaches) are used that are associated with less inflammatory responses (as determined from interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein levels). The observation that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are effective in reducing the duration of ileus supports this hypothesis (but these are often avoided because of concern for bleeding).
Taken together, these findings suggest that epidural analgesia with local anesthetics may shorten the duration of postoperative ileus because of an anti-inflammatory action of the local anesthetic. Modulating effects of local anesthetics on the inflammatory system are well known, and have been described in vitro, in animal studies, and to a lesser extent in clinical trials. In animals, inflammatory-mediated injury in heart is ameliorated by local anesthetics, as is endotoxin- or acid-mediated lung injury. In humans, thrombosis incidence11 and hypercoagulation after surgery (both inflammatory-mediated processes) are decreased by systemic local anesthetics (yet physiologic coagulation is not affected). Important in the current context, the effectiveness of local anesthetics in the setting of inflammatory bowel disease is well established. The compounds have been shown to decrease the release of inflammatory mediators from neutrophils, which may play a role in this beneficial effect. As another example, cognitive deficits after cardiac surgery probably result from a combination of emboli and the inflammatory response that these induce in the brain. Systemic local anesthetics would be expected to interfere with both of these processes, and indeed improve cognitive outcome in this setting.16 The mechanism behind this action is most likely a modulatory effect of local anesthetics on neutrophils. Local anesthetics have been shown to inhibit neutrophil priming (a critical component of neutrophil-mediated tissue injury), but not to interfere with activation (required for wound healing and host defense). Importantly, and in contrast to classic inflammatory suppression, this inflammatory modulation by local anesthetics is therefore not associated with detrimental effects on wound healing and infection rates. We have shown that selective inhibition by local anesthetics of cellular Gq proteins explains this effect. Other effects, including those on mediator release, may also play a role. Since epidural anesthesia leads to significant blood levels of local anesthetics (1 to 5 µM), it is conceivable that the inflammatory modulatory action of systemically absorbed local anesthetic explains the beneficial effects of epidural analgesia on duration of postoperative ileus. An additional beneficial effect on return of bowel function will result from the reduced requirement for opiate analgesics.
If this is the case, then a similar beneficial effect might be obtained using systemic administration of local anesthetics. Both the inflammatory modulatory effects and the analgesic actions (thereby decreasing opiate requirements) are present when these drugs are given intravenously. This approach would have significant advantages over epidural administration. The common use of perioperative anticoagulation for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis has made appropriate timing of epidural placement and removal considerably more difficult. Epidural placement and management costs time and adds expense. Many patients may not desire the placement of an epidural catheter. In addition, the uncommon but real risks of epidural placement (certainly in the thoracic region) would be avoided by systemic administration of the local anesthetic. The major risks are epidural hematoma or abscess, both of which can be devastating.
Several clinical trials indicate that systemic local anesthetics have beneficial actions on the return of bowel function after surgery. In patients undergoing radical prostatectomy, administration of lidocaine (3 mg/min) for the duration of surgery and 1 h postoperatively resulted in a 1 day earlier return of bowel function and an associated earlier discharge from the hospital as compared with placebo. Significantly earlier return of propulsive motility in the colon was also observed in patients undergoing cholecystectomy who received intravenous lidocaine (3 mg/min intraoperatively and continued 24 h post surgery). Similarly, intraoperative instillation of bupivacaine demonstrated beneficial effects on colonic motility.
However, no study has investigated the effect on postoperative bowel function of systemically administered local anesthetic after bowel surgery. It is in this setting that restoration of bowel function is most relevant. We hypothesize that intravenous, intraoperative and postoperative administration of local anesthetic, added to patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for post-operative pain relief, will result in more rapid return of bowel function as compared with PCA alone. This hypothesis will be tested in a randomized, blinded, controlled clinical trial in patients undergoing open colectomy for tumor.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
2
lidocaine intravenously
lidocaine
lidocaine 2 mg/min intravenously (or 3 mg/kg in patients \> 70 kg)
1
epidural local anesthetic
bupivacaine with hydromorphone
bupivacaine 0.125% with hydromorphone 6 mcg/ml epidurally at 10 ml/h
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
bupivacaine with hydromorphone
bupivacaine 0.125% with hydromorphone 6 mcg/ml epidurally at 10 ml/h
lidocaine
lidocaine 2 mg/min intravenously (or 3 mg/kg in patients \> 70 kg)
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Scheduled for colon tumor resection.
* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical classification classes I, II, and III.
Exclusion Criteria
* Allergy to local anesthetics
* Severe cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction within 6 months, profoundly decreased left ventricular function (ejection fraction \<40%), or high-grade arrhythmias) or liver disease (known AST or ALT or bilirubin \>2.5 times the upper limit of normal)
* Systemic corticosteroid use
* Chronic use of opiates
* Unwillingness or contraindication to epidural analgesia.
18 Years
75 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Virginia
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
University of Virginia
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Marcel E Durieux, MD PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Virginia
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Swenson BR, Gottschalk A, Wells LT, Rowlingson JC, Thompson PW, Barclay M, Sawyer RG, Friel CM, Foley E, Durieux ME. Intravenous lidocaine is as effective as epidural bupivacaine in reducing ileus duration, hospital stay, and pain after open colon resection: a randomized clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2010 Jul-Aug;35(4):370-6. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181e8d5da.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
MED001
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.