MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415523353 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000007786

Intravenous Lidocaine for Postoperative Pain in Children Undergoing Tonsillectomies: A Double-Blinded, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4415523353 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hubert A. Benzon, Michael R. King, Keith J. Kilner, Ravi D. Shah, Kathleen R. Billings, Stephen R. Hoff, Robert J. McCarthy

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidocainePostoperative painAnalgesicClinical trialRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tonsillectomy is a commonly performed surgical procedure in children, and the recovery period can be associated with significant postoperative pain. Currently, there are no studies examining the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine in decreasing post-tonsillectomy pain in children. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine for decreasing postsurgical pain in children undergoing tonsillectomy. METHODS: This study was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial of children ages 4-10 years undergoing tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy. Subjects were assigned to 1 of 2 groups: (i) intravenous lidocaine bolus (1.5 mg/kg) at anesthesia induction followed by a continuous intraoperative and postoperative infusion dose (2 mg/kg/h) or (ii) the equivalent volume of saline for 1 hour. The primary outcome was opioid consumption in milligram morphine equivalents (MME) in the postanesthesia care unit. Secondary outcome measures included pain intensity in the postanesthesia care unit measured using the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale and emergence agitation measured using the Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium scale, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and parent-reported pain intensity and medication administration at home. RESULTS: Ninety subjects were randomized and 88 completed the study: 44 received lidocaine and 44 received saline. There was no difference in adjusted postanesthesia care unit morphine consumption per kg of body weight, difference -0.01 MME/kg (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.07 to 0.04; P = .627), or total morphine use, difference -0.03 MME/kg (95% CI, -0.08 to 0.03; P = .360) between groups. There was no significant difference in Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale or Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium scale scores or ondansetron dose. In the first postoperative week, there were no differences in parent postoperative pain measures, nausea/vomiting, ibuprofen, acetaminophen, or opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis showed no evidence for a clinical benefit of intraoperative lidocaine infusion in children undergoing tonsillectomy. Our findings highlight the importance of characterizing non-opioid analgesic techniques in children, which have previously shown promise in adults.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207