Cited by 53Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsHernia repair and managementPain Management and Treatment

Lidocaine Patch (5%) in Treatment of Persistent Inguinal Postherniorrhaphy Pain: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Crossover Trial

Open access
Bischoff, Joakim M., Petersen, Marian, Üçeyler, Nurcan, Sommer, Claudia, Kehlet, Henrik, Werner, Mads U.·2013·Anesthesiology

Abstract

Background: Evidence-based pharmacological treatment options for patients with persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain are lacking. Methods: Twenty-one male patients, with severe, unilateral, persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain, participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial, receiving lidocaine patch (5%) and placebo patch treatments in periods of 14 days separated by a 14-day wash-out period. Pain intensities (at rest, during movement, and pressure evoked [Numerical Rating Scale]) were assessed before treatment and on the last 3 days of each treatment period. Patients were a priori divided into two subgroups based on quantitative sensory testing (+/− thermal “hyposensitivity”). Skin biopsies for intraepidermal nerve fiber density assessment were taken at baseline, and quantitative sensory testing was performed before and after each treatment period. The primary outcome was change in pain intensity assessed as the difference in summed pain intensity differences between lidocaine and placebo patch treatments. Results: There was no difference in summed pain intensity differences between lidocaine and placebo patch treatments in all patients (mean difference 6.2% [95% CI = −6.6 to 18.9%]; P = 0.33) or in the two subgroups (+/− thermal “hyposensitivity”). The quantitative sensory testing (n = 21) demonstrated an increased pressure pain thresholds after lidocaine compared with placebo patch treatment. Baseline intraepidermal nerve fiber density (n = 21) was lower on the pain side compared with the nonpain side (−3.8 fibers per millimeter [95% CI = −6.1 to −1.4]; P = 0.003). One patient developed mild erythema in the groin during both treatments. Conclusions: Lidocaine patch treatment did not reduce combined resting and dynamic pain ratings compared with placebo in patients with severe, persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/aln.0b013e3182a2a243

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial among 21 male patients having unilateral severe persistent inguinal pain following herniorrhaphy showed no significant improvement with a 14-day application of a 5% lidocaine patch.

    “A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial among 21 male patient having unilateral severe persistent inguinal pain following herniorrhaphy, showed no significant improvement with a 14-day application of a 5% lidocaine patch [56].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bischoff, J. M., Petersen, M., Üçeyler, N., Sommer, C., Kehlet, H., & Werner, M. U.
Affiliations
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Research Nurse
  • Assistant Professor
  • Universitätsklinikum Würzburg (DE)
Venue
Anesthesiology
Published
2013-12
Volume
119
Issue
6
Pages
1444-1452
ISSN
0003-3022 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2103852840
Cited by
53
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Anesthesiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (FP7/20072013)
  • European Commission (115007, 2007–2013, FP7 2007-2013, FP7/2007)
  • Rigshospitalet
  • Innovative Medicines Initiative (FP7/2007‐2013, 115007)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hernia repair and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
lidocaine patch, chronic postoperative pain, inguinal hernia repair, topical analgesia, quantitative sensory testing, pressure pain threshold, intraepidermal nerve fiber density
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Anesthetics, Local, Double-Blind Method, Female, Hernia, Inguinal, Humans, Lidocaine, Male, Middle Aged, Nerve Fibers, Pain Measurement, Postoperative Pain, Sensory Thresholds, Skin, Sleep Wake Disorders, Patient Satisfaction, Cross-Over Studies, Endpoint Determination, Transdermal Patch, Herniorrhaphy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review