Intravenous and Intraperitoneal Lignocaine for Perioperative Analgesia in Laparoscopic Colon Resections

NCT ID: NCT03105193

Last Updated: 2020-11-03

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

60 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2018-08-17

Study Completion Date

2019-12-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The aim of this study is to investigate the analgesic effects of intraperitoneal lignocaine (IPL) compared with intravenous lignocaine (IVL) after laparoscopic colon resections. We plan to run a 2 group randomized, double blind, clinical trial which will look into morphine consumption as the primary outcome.

Group 1 (IV lignocaine)- IV bolus of lignocaine and a 3 day post operative IV lignocaine infusion. Intra peritoneal (IP) bolus of normal saline + 3 day post operative IP normal saline infusion

Group 2 (IP lignocaine)- IV bolus of normal saline and a 3 day post operative IV normal saline infusion. IP bolus of lignocaine + 3 day post operative IP lignocaine infusion

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Over the last 20 years, laparoscopic colonic surgery has become an accepted first-line treatment for colon cancer. A population-based study showed that laparoscopic colonic resections can be performed with lower hospital costs up to 90 days after discharge when compared to open surgery. Laparoscopic colonic resections have also been associated with fewer postoperative complications and lower mortality.

New Zealand has one of the highest rates of bowel cancer in the world, and it is the second highest cause of cancer deaths in New Zealand. With the implementation of a bowel screening programme in New Zealand, the projected numbers of stage 1 bowel cancers are expected to increase. More avenues to improve perioperative care need to be explored to improve patient outcomes.

Controlling postoperative pain effectively has been shown to reduce the length of hospital stay and improve patient/clinical outcomes. Opioids work as μ-receptor agonists in the spinal cord and brain, and although opioids are excellent at reducing pain, they are associated with nausea, vomiting, dizziness, decreased blood pressure, and urinary retention. Epidurals have been incorporated into Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols for controlling post-operative pain. However, epidurals are an invasive procedure with significant side effects such as hypotension, urinary retention, respiratory depression, motor blockade and rarely epidural abscess and meningitis. It has also been shown that up to 30 percent of epidural catheters dislodge, block or leak. These complications have led to a movement towards other regional analgesia techniques which allow local anaesthetic (LA) to target the abdominal wound specifically.

Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic (IPLA) has shown promise in reducing pain after colonic surgery with a meta-analysis9, and a recent IPLA colorectal study conducted at Counties Manukau health showing that it reduces pain and opioid use over and above the effect of an epidural10, which is primarily aimed at the abdominal wound. After an IPLA bolus serum local anaesthetic levels are detectable within 2 minutes. Some studies show reduced early postoperative pain and opioid consumption with intravenous lignocaine infusion alone. The question remains however if there is a benefit from using intraperitoneal local anaesthetic compared to administering it intravenously as the IPLA should block both the intraabdominal wound, via a local action, and the skin wound via a systemic action.. This has been investigated in four studies, however none of these studies compared intravenous local anaesthetic (IVLA) and IPLA for colon resection.

The aim is that, by optimising analgesia regimes using local anaesthetic, we can improve patient experience of pain and recovery thereby achieving an earlier discharge and early recovery from surgery. This has significant economic benefits for all involved.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Laparoscopic Colon Resection Perioperative Analgesia

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

QUADRUPLE

Participants Caregivers Investigators Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Intraperitoneal Lignocaine

IP Lignocaine

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

IV Saline bolus and infusion

Intervention Type DRUG

Intravenous bolus of normal saline at induction 3 day postoperative infusion of normal saline administered by ambit pump

IP Lignocaine bolus and infusion

Intervention Type DRUG

Intraperitoneal bolus of lignocaine down first port site. 3 day post operative intraperitoneal infusion of lignocaine via an intraperitoneal line inserted by the surgeon. Infusion will be administered by ambit pump.

Intravenous lignocaine

IV lignocaine

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

IP Saline bolus and infusion

Intervention Type DRUG

Intraperitoneal bolus of normal saline down first port site. 3 day post operative intraperitoneal infusion of normal saline via an intraperitoneal line inserted by the surgeon. Infusion will be administered by ambit pump.

IV lignocaine bolus and infusion

Intervention Type DRUG

Intravenous lignocaine bolus at induction. 3 day postoperative IV infusion of lignocaine administered by ambit pump

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

IV Saline bolus and infusion

Intravenous bolus of normal saline at induction 3 day postoperative infusion of normal saline administered by ambit pump

Intervention Type DRUG

IP Saline bolus and infusion

Intraperitoneal bolus of normal saline down first port site. 3 day post operative intraperitoneal infusion of normal saline via an intraperitoneal line inserted by the surgeon. Infusion will be administered by ambit pump.

Intervention Type DRUG

IV lignocaine bolus and infusion

Intravenous lignocaine bolus at induction. 3 day postoperative IV infusion of lignocaine administered by ambit pump

Intervention Type DRUG

IP Lignocaine bolus and infusion

Intraperitoneal bolus of lignocaine down first port site. 3 day post operative intraperitoneal infusion of lignocaine via an intraperitoneal line inserted by the surgeon. Infusion will be administered by ambit pump.

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Lidocaine Lidocaine

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* consecutive consenting patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colonic resections will be recruited from surgical outpatient clinics at Manukau Super Clinic.

Exclusion Criteria

* under 16 years of age
* acute colonic resection
* those with ASA \>= 4
* previous adverse reaction/allergy to local anaesthetic,
* surgery for rectal lesions which was defined as lesion within 15 cm of the anal verge
* preoperative systemic steroid dependence
* hepatic dysfunction, opioid use greater than 6 months
* a diagnosis of Chronic Pain Syndrome
* inability to consent or complete data scores in the study questionnaires due to cognitive impairment and/or language barrier.
Minimum Eligible Age

16 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University of Auckland, New Zealand

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Andrew G Hill, MBChB, MD (Thesis), EdD, FACS, FRACS

Prof.

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Andrew G Hill

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

The University of Auckland

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Manukau Surgical Centre, Middlemore Hospital

Auckland, , New Zealand

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

New Zealand

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

IPL/IVL

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id