Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Pain Research and Management
Volume 2017, Article ID 1721460, 6 pages
Clinical Study

Spinal Anesthesia and Spinal Anesthesia with Subdiaphragmatic Lidocaine in Shoulder Pain Reduction for Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial

1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Arash Women’s Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2Department of Epidemiology and Reproductive Health, Reproductive Epidemiology Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence should be addressed to Mahroo Rezaeinejad; moc.oohay@dajenieazer_oorham

Received 25 March 2017; Accepted 20 June 2017; Published 8 August 2017

Academic Editor: Phillip J. Wiffen

Copyright © 2017 Zahra Asgari et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Objective. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of spinal anesthesia with subdiaphragmatic lidocaine at the beginning of surgery versus spinal anesthesia in pain reduction for gynecological laparoscopic surgery. Methods. This was a clinical trial conducted in Arash Hospital, Tehran, Iran. Eighty-four patients were randomized to either spinal anesthesia with subdiaphragmatic lidocaine, spinal anesthesia, or general anesthesia (GA). The primary outcome was patients’ pain perception during surgery, 2, 4, 6, and 12 hours after surgery, and prior to discharge and was assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS). Results. The results showed that there are no significant changes in pain perception over time in none of the three groups ( = 0.37, ). The severity of pain experienced by patients at all-time interval after surgery was similar between groups [ = 0.54, ]. Conclusion. The use of subdiaphragmatic lidocaine at the beginning of surgery combined with spinal anesthesia was not associated with a statistically significant difference in patients’ postoperative VAS scores compared to spinal anesthesia and GA during and after gynecological surgical procedures. The study was registered in Iranian Registry of Clinical Trial by the number of IRCT2016022226698N1.