Comparison of Intraabdominal and Trocar Site Local Anaesthetic Infiltration on Postoperative Analgesia After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of local anaesthetic infiltration to trocar wounds and intraperitoneally on postoperative pain as a part of a multimodal analgesia method after laparoscopic cholecystectomies.

METHODS

The study was performed on 90 ASA I-III patients aged between 20 and 70 years who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. All patients had the same general anaesthesia drug regimen. Patients were randomized into three groups by a closed envelope method: group I (n=30), trocar site local anaesthetic infiltration (20 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine); group II (n=30), intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation (20 mL of 0.5%) and group III (n=30), saline infiltration both trocar sites and intraperitoneally. Postoperative i.v. patient controlled analgesia was initiated for 24 h. In total, 4 mg of i.v. ondansetron was administered to all patients. Visual analogue scale (VAS), nausea and vomiting and shoulder pain were evaluated at 1., 2., 4., 8., 12., 24. hours. An i.v. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) (50 mg of dexketoprofen) as a rescue analgesic was given if the VAS was ≥5.

RESULTS

There were no statistical significant differences between the clinical and demographic properties among the three groups (p≥0.005). During all periods, VAS in group I was significantly lower than that in groups II and III (p<0.001). Among the groups, although there was no significant difference in nausea and vomiting (p=0.058), there was a significant difference in shoulder pain. Group III (p<0.05) had more frequent shoulder pain than groups I and II. The total morphine consumption was higher in groups II and III (p<0.001 vs p<0.001) than in group I. The requirement for a rescue analgesic was significantly higher in group III (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Trocar site local anaesthetic infiltration is more effective for postoperative analgesia, easier to apply and safer than other analgesia methods. Morphine consumption is lesser and side effects are fewer; therefore, this method can be used as a part of common practice.