Intravenous and Intraperitoneal Lignocaine for Perioperative Analgesia in Laparoscopic Colon Resections

Overview

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

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.