Abstract :
Background: Growing concerns regarding opioid-related side effects and complications have prompted alternative analgesic modalities for post-operative pain in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of Lidocaine and Dexmedetomidine infusions administered intraoperatively by evaluating post-operative VAS scores, hemodynamic parameters, recovery profiles, total number of rescue analgesics required, and any side effects of the study drugs between the two groups.
Materials and Methods: Interventional, double-blind, randomized study on 66 ASA I/II class patients aged 18 to 60 years of both genders. These Patients were randomized to Group L (Lidocaine) and Group D (Dexmedetomidine). Hemodynamic Parameters were noted at pre-defined time frames intra/post-operatively. Post-operative Visual Analogue Scale Score and Richmond Agitation Sedation Score monitoring was done.
Results: The study did not result in any significant hemodynamic event, indicating the safety of both Lidocaine and Dexmedetomidine. Moreover, both drugs were found to be effective in managing post-operative pain but mean VAS was found to be significantly lower in Group D as compared to that in Group L at 120 min follow-up only (p
Conclusion: It can be inferred that perioperative infusion of both Lidocaine and Dexmedetomidine effectively delayed the post-operative rescue analgesic need, with similar recovery profiles. However, of the two, Dexmedetomidine had a slight edge over Lidocaine in terms of analgesic effect and recovery profile.
Keyword :
Lidocaine, Dexmedetomidine, Post- operative pain, Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, Post- operative recovery.