Comparing Effect of Opioid-sparing Versus Conventional Anesthesia on Quality of Recovery After Emergency Laparotomy

Trial statusNot yet recruiting
Trial phaseNot applicable
Trial typeInterventional
Biological sexAll
Age18-65
SponsorCairo University

About this trial

Aim of the Work The investigators aim to compare lidocaine-based anesthesia versus conventional anesthesia in the presence of multimodal analgesia protocol in terms of early quality of recovery and analgesic efficacy.

Objectives To compare quality of recovery using the Quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) score between lidocaine-based anesthesia in relation to conventional anesthesia in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy.

Hypothesis the investigators hypothesize that lidocaine-based regimen would be effective in reducing opioid use and provide superior quality of recovery compared to conventional opioid-routine anesthesia in emergency laparotomy.

Eligibility criteria

Qualifiers

Adult patients (18-65 years)

ASA I-III undergoing emergency laparotomy with midline incision.

Disqualifiers

Severe cardiac morbidities (impaired contractility with ejection fraction < 45%, heart block, arrhythmias, tight valvular lesions) and patients on beta-blockers

Patients on vasopressor infusion, patients with high shock index (heart rate / systolic blood pressure >1)

Body mass index <18 or > 35 Kg/m2,

Pregnant or lactating women,

Trial design

Treatments tested in this trial

  • : two syringes of lidocaine 10 mg/mL will be prepared. A 10-mL syringe (induction syringe) will be given during the induction of anesthesia and A 50 mL syringe (infusion syringe) will be used as conti
  • A 10-mL syringe of 10 mcg/mL fentanyl (induction syringe) and a 50-mL syringe of saline (infusion syringe) will be prepared as placebo.

Treatment groups

120 Participants
are divided into 2 treatment groups

Locations

This trial has no locations

Sponsors and collaborators