Inhibitory effect of lidocaine on colonic spasm during colonoscopy: A multicenter double‐blind, randomized controlled trial. Issue 2 (17th October 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nemoto, Daiki; Suzuki, Sho; Mori, Hideki; Katsuki, Shinichi; Iwaki, Tomoyuki; Aizawa, Masato; Takeuchi, Yoji; Uraoka, Toshio; Matsuda, Tomoki; Fujita, Tomoki; Hewett, David G.; Togashi, Kazutomo
• Is Part Of: Digestive endoscopy. Volume 31:Issue 2(2019)
• Page Start: 173
• Page End: 179
• Publication Date: 2018-10-17
• Subjects: antispasmodic agent -- colon spasm -- colonoscopy -- lidocaine -- peristalsis; Digestive organs -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Digestive organs -- Diseases -- Diagnosis -- Periodicals; Endoscopy -- Periodicals; Digestive System Diseases -- diagnosis -- Periodicals; Digestive System Diseases -- therapy -- Periodicals; Endoscopy -- Periodicals; 616.3
• DOI: 10.1111/den.13272
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0915-5635

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: Colonic spasm can interfere with colonoscopy, but antispasmodic agents can cause complications. This study aimed to assess the inhibitory effect of topical lidocaine compared with a placebo control. Methods: In five tertiary‐care hospitals in Japan, 128 patients requiring endoscopic resection of a colorectal lesion were enrolled and randomly and double‐blindly allocated to colonoscopy with topical administration of 2% lidocaine solution 20mL (LID, n = 64) or normal saline 20mL (control, n = 64). During colonoscopy, the assigned solution was applied with a spray catheter near the lesion and the area was observed for three minutes. primary endpoint was the inhibitory effect at three time‐points (1, 2 and 3 minutes after dispersion), using a three‐point scale (excellent, fair, poor). Secondary endpoints were rebound spasm and adverse events. All endpoints were scored in real time. Serum lidocaine levels were measured in 32 patients (LID 16, control 16). Results: There were no significant differences between groups in patient demographics. At all time‐points, the proportion of patients with "excellent" scores was greater in LID group than control group, with significant differences observed at 2 minutes ( p = 0.02) and 3 minutes ( p = 0.02). In LID group, the rate of "excellent" scores increased by 12.5% at 2 minutes and was maintained at 3 minutes. Rebound spasm did not occur in LID group, compared with 15.6% of control group ( p = 0.001). There were no adverse events in LID group. All serum lidocaine levels were below detectable levels. Conclusions: Topical lidocaine is an effective and safe method for suppressing colorectal spasm during colonoscopy (UMIN000024733).