C Miller Andrew C, Faza Colton, Castro Bigalli Alberto A, M Khan Abbas, A Sewell Kerry, King Alexandra, Vahedian-Azimi Amir, Zehtabchi Shahriar
Department of Emergency Medicine, Vidant Medical Center, East Carolina University Brody School of Medicine, Greenville, NC, USA.
The Morzak Collaborative, Greenville, NC, USA.
Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2020 Mar 18;8(1):e27. eCollection 2020.
Renal colic affects 12% of the U.S. population, accounting for nearly 1% of emergency department (ED) visits. Current recommendations advocate narcotic-limiting multimodal analgesia regimens. The objective of this review is to determine if in patients with renal colic (Population), intravenous (IV) amide anesthetics (Intervention) result in better pain control, lower requirements for rescue analgesia, or less adverse medication effects (outcome) compared to placebo, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or opiates (Comparisons).
Scholarly databases and relevant bibliographies were searched using a pre-designed systematic review protocol and registered with PROSPERO. Inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized clinical trial (RCT), (2) age ≥ 18 years, (3) confirmed or presumed renal colic, (4) amide anesthetic administered IV. Eligible comparison groups included: placebo, conventional therapy, acetaminophen, NSAID, or opiate. The primary outcome was pain intensity at baseline, 30, 60, and 120 minutes. Trial quality was graded, and risk-of-bias was assessed.
Of the 3930 identified references, 4 RCTs (479 participants) were included. One trial (n=240) reported improved analgesia with IV lidocaine (Lido) plus metoclopramide, compared to morphine. All other trials reported unchanged or less analgesia compared to placebo, ketorolac, or fentanyl. Very severe heterogeneity (I= 88%) precluded pooling data.
Current evidence precludes drawing a firm conclusion on the efficacy or superiority of Lido over traditional therapies for ED patients with renal colic. Evidence suggests Lido may be an effective non-opiate analgesic alliterative; however, it's efficacy may not exceed that of NSAIDs or opiates. Further study is needed to validate the potential improved efficacy of Lido plus metoclopramide.
肾绞痛影响着12%的美国人口,占急诊科就诊人数的近1%。目前的建议提倡限制使用麻醉剂的多模式镇痛方案。本综述的目的是确定在肾绞痛患者(人群)中,与安慰剂、非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)或阿片类药物(对照)相比,静脉注射(IV)酰胺类麻醉剂(干预)是否能带来更好的疼痛控制、更低的急救镇痛需求或更少的药物不良反应(结果)。
使用预先设计的系统评价方案检索学术数据库和相关参考文献,并在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO)进行注册。纳入标准为:(1)随机临床试验(RCT);(2)年龄≥18岁;(3)确诊或疑似肾绞痛;(4)静脉注射酰胺类麻醉剂。符合条件的对照组包括:安慰剂、传统疗法、对乙酰氨基酚、NSAIDs或阿片类药物。主要结局是基线、30、60和120分钟时的疼痛强度。对试验质量进行分级,并评估偏倚风险。
在3930篇检索到的参考文献中,纳入了4项RCT(479名参与者)。一项试验(n = 240)报告称,与吗啡相比,静脉注射利多卡因(Lido)加甲氧氯普胺可改善镇痛效果。与安慰剂、酮咯酸或芬太尼相比,所有其他试验报告的镇痛效果未变或更差。非常严重的异质性(I = 88%)使得无法合并数据。
目前的证据无法就利多卡因相对于传统疗法对急诊科肾绞痛患者疗效或优越性得出确凿结论。有证据表明利多卡因可能是一种有效的非阿片类镇痛替代药物;然而,其疗效可能不超过NSAIDs或阿片类药物。需要进一步研究来验证利多卡因加甲氧氯普胺潜在的疗效改善。