Intra-articular lidocaine versus intravenous analgesia and sedation for manual closed reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocation: an updated meta-analysis

Study ObjectiveTo compare intra-articular lidocaine (IAL) with intravenous analgesia and sedation (IVAS) for manual closed reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocation.DesignMeta-analysis.SettingMetropolitan medical university.MeasurementsA literature search was conducted of PubMed, Ovid and Cochrane Library, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from January 1, 1990 to September 1, 2012, that compared IAL with IVAS for manual closed reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocation. Effective data were pooled using fixed-effects or random-effects models with mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively.Main ResultsNine RCTs comprising 438 patients were analyzed. Statistical analyses showed that IAL was superior to IVAS with respect to lower complication risk (P < 0.00001) and shorter mean hospital length of stay (P = 0.03). No significant differences were noted in success of joint reduction (P = 0.16), patient satisfaction (P = 0.12), or postreduction pain relief (P = 0.76). However, IAL required more time than IVAS from injection to reduction (P < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses showed that IVAS was associated with higher risks of respiratory depression (P < 0.0001), vomiting (P = 0.04), and thrombophlebitis (P = 0.008), but no statistical differences were identified in nausea (P = 0.06), hypotension (P = 0.10), drowsiness (P = 0.45), or headache (P = 0.29).ConclusionsIntra-articular lidocaine injection may be safer than IVAS because there are fewer risks of postoperative complications with IAL. Both techniques are similarly effective for manual closed reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocation.