Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Ann Emerg Med. 2019 Feb 25. pii: S0196-0644(19)30043-5. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2019.01.021. [Epub ahead of print]

Randomized Trial of Intravenous Lidocaine Versus Hydromorphone for Acute Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department.

Author information

1
Department of Emergency Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore, Bronx, NY; Department of Emergency Medicine, Jacobi Medical Center, Bronx, NY.
2
Department of Emergency Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore, Bronx, NY. Electronic address: bwfriedmanmd@gmail.com.
3
Medical College, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore, Bronx, NY.
4
Department of Emergency Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore, Bronx, NY.
5
Pharmacy Department, Montefiore, Bronx, NY.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE:

We compare the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine with that of hydromorphone for the treatment of acute abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS:

This was a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial conducted in 2 EDs in the Bronx, NY. Adults weighing 60 to 120 kg were randomized to receive 120 mg of intravenous lidocaine or 1 mg of intravenous hydromorphone. Thirty minutes after administration of the first dose of the study drug, participants were asked whether they needed a second dose of the investigational medication to which they were randomized. Patients were also stratified according to clinical suspicion of nephrolithiasis. The primary outcome was improvement in pain scores of 0 to 10 between baseline and 90 minutes. An important secondary outcome was need for "off-protocol" parenteral analgesics, including opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

RESULTS:

We enrolled 154 patients, of whom 77 received lidocaine and 77 received hydromorphone. By 90 minutes, patients randomized to lidocaine improved by a mean of 3.8 points on the 0-to-10 scale, whereas those randomized to hydromorphone improved by a mean of 5.0 points (mean difference 1.2; 95% confidence interval 0.3 to 2.2). Need for off-protocol "rescue" analgesics occurred for 39 of 77 lidocaine patients (51%) and 20 of 77 hydromorphone patients (26%) (difference 25%; 95% confidence interval 10% to 40%). Adverse events were comparable between groups. Among the subset of 22 patients with nephrolithiasis, lidocaine patients reported a mean improvement of 3.4 points on the pain scale, whereas hydromorphone patients reported a mean improvement of 6.4 points (mean difference 3.0; 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 5.5).

CONCLUSION:

Intravenous hydromorphone was superior to intravenous lidocaine both for general abdominal pain and a subset of patients with nephrolithiasis. A majority of patients randomly allocated to lidocaine required additional analgesics.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center