Lidocaine Spray versus Other Forms for Local Anesthesia in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Theerada  Chandee; Saritphat  Orrapin; Prasit  Mahawongkajit; Neranchala  Soonthornkes; Chuleerat  Suptongchai; Thanatcha  Luangmaneerat; Sudsayam Manuwong

doi:10.33192/smj.v77i10.276670

Authors

Theerada Chandee Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand
Saritphat Orrapin Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand; Research Group in Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand
Prasit Mahawongkajit Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand; Research Group in Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand
Neranchala Soonthornkes Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand
Chuleerat Suptongchai Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand
Thanatcha Luangmaneerat Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand
Sudsayam Manuwong Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33192/smj.v77i10.276670

Keywords:

Anesthesia, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, lidocaine

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of various lidocaine forms compared to the traditional spray during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).

Materials and Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL, Web of Science Core Collection, World Health Organization, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases in December 2022. Selection criteria were randomized controlled trials comparing lidocaine spray with other forms of pharyngeal anesthesia. Outcomes of interest included ease of instrumentation, participants’ satisfaction scores, tolerance scores, pain, endoscopist’s satisfaction scores, and procedural time.

Results: We included 13 trials with 3,711 participants. The quality of trials was poor. Lidocaine spray provided better ease of instrumentation (risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence intervals (CI)1.06,1.34; I2 = 66%; very low certainty of evidence), decreased participants’ pain (mean difference (MD) 0.38, 95% CI 0.25,0.5; I2 = 92%; very low certainty of evidence), and shorter procedural time (MD 0.22, 95% CI 0.10,0.35; I2 = 13%; low certainty of evidence). However, spray had lower participants’ highest satisfaction scores (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.76,0.92; I2 = 62%; very low certainty of evidence), participants’ mean satisfaction scores (MD -0.61, 95% CI -0.29,-0.04; I2 = 92%; very low certainty of evidence), participants’ tolerance scores (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71,0.97; I2 = 0%; low certainty of evidence), and endoscopist’s satisfaction scores (MD -0.33, 95% CI -0.45,-0.21; I2 = 94%; very low certainty of evidence).

Conclusion: Evidence suggests that lidocaine spray may improve the ease of EGD instrumentation, although limitations in trial quality warrant cautious interpretation.

References

ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Early DS, Lightdale JR, Vargo JJ, Acosta RD, Chandrasekhara V, et al. Guidelines for sedation and anesthesia in GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;87:327-37.

Campo R, Brullet E, Montserrat A, Calvet X, Moix J, Rué M, et al. Identification of factors that influence tolerance of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1999;11:201-4.

Sharma VK, Nguyen CC, Crowell MD, Lieberman DA, De Garmo P, Fleischer DE. A national study of cardiopulmonary unplanned events after GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;66:27-34.

VHA Pharmacy Benefits Management Strategic Healthcare Group. A guidance on the use of topical anesthetics for Naso/oropharyngeal and laryngotracheal procedures [Internet]. Ucm.es. [cited 2024 Mar 15]. Available from: https://www.ucm.es/data/cont/docs/107-2016-07-20-DEPRESORES43.pdf

Kollmann CM, Schmiegel W, Brechmann T. Gastrointestinal endoscopy under sedation is associated with pneumonia in older inpatients-results of a retrospective case-control study. United European Gastroenterol J. 2018;6:382-90.

Jirapinyo P, Thompson CC. Sedation challenges: obesity and sleep apnea. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2016;26:527-37.

Amornyotin S, Srikureja W, Chalayonnavin W, Kongphlay S, Chatchawankitkul S. Topical viscous lidocaine solution versus lidocaine spray for pharyngeal anesthesia in unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Endoscopy. 2009;41:581-6.

Asante MA, Northfield TC. Variation in taste of topical lignocaine anaesthesia for gastroscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 1998;12:685-6.

Noitasaeng P, Vichitvejpaisal P, Kaosombatwattana U, Tassanee J, Suwannee S. Comparison of spraying and nebulized lidocaine in patients undergoing esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy: a randomized trial. J Med Assoc Thai. 2016;99:462-8.

Soweid AM, Yaghi SR, Jamali FR, Kobeissy AA, Mallat ME, Hussein R, et al. Posterior lingual lidocaine: a novel method to improve tolerance in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. World J Gastroenterol. 2011;17:5191-6.

Salale N, Treldal C, Mogensen S, Rasmussen M, Petersen J, Andersen O, et al. Bupivacaine lozenge compared with lidocaine spray as topical pharyngeal anesthetic before unsedated upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized, controlled trial. Clin Med Insights Gastroenterol. 2014;7:55-9.

Chan CK, Fok KL, Poon CM. Flavored anesthetic lozenge versus xylocaine spray used as topical pharyngeal anesthesia for unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:897-901.

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:B2700.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2021;10:89.

Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, Chaimani A, Schmid CH, Cameron C, et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:777-84.

Higgins JPT, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Sterne JAC. Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. Chichester UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2019. p. 205-28.

Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A, editors. GRADE handbook for grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Updated October 2013. The GRADE Working Group, 2013. Available from guidelinedevelopment.org/handbook.

Nordic Cochrane Center. The cochrane collaboration review manager 5 (RevMan 5). Version 5.4. Copenhagen: Nordic Cochrane Center, The Cochrane Collaboration; 2020.

Schünemann HJ, Vist GE, Higgins JPT, Santesso N, Deeks JJ, Glasziou P, et al. Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Higgins JP, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Chichester UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2019. p. 403-31.

Mahawongkajit P, Talalak N, Soonthornkes N. Comparison of lidocaine spray and lidocaine ice popsicle in patients undergoing unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a single center prospective randomized controlled trial. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2021;14:209-16.

Nasiri J, Amin A, Ganji F. The effect of eutectic mixture of local anesthesia cream (EMLA) on satisfaction, pain, and nausea/vomiting of patients undergoing gastro-intestinal endoscopy-a randomized clinical trial comparing EMLA cream and gel, lidocaine gel and spray, and placebo. Glob J Health Sci. 2024;9:273-9.

Çam H, Pehlivan S, Dağ MS, Yılmaz N, Demir U, Gülşen MT. Study of ideal topical pharyngeal anesthesia in upper gastrointestinal system endoscopy: a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2016;27:103-7.

Supe A, Haribhakti SP, Ali M, Rathnaswami A, Ulla TZ, Maroo SH, et al. Lidocaine lozenges for pharyngeal anesthesia during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. J Dig Endosc. 2014;5:58-63.

Mallik D, Singh A, Narayan J. Study on nebulized or sprayed lidocaine as anesthesia for esophago-gastro duodenoscopy (EGD). Int J Appl Res. 2019;5:125-8.

Ayoub C, Skoury A, Abdul-Baki H, Nasr V, Soweid A. Lidocaine lollipop as single-agent anesthesia in upper GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;66:786-93.

Khodadoostan M, Sadeghian S, Safaei A, Shavakhi AR, Shavakhi A. Viscous lidocaine solution versus lidocaine spray for pharyngeal local anesthesia in upper gastroesophageal endoscopy. J Res Med Sci. 2018;23:102.

Hayashi T, Asahina Y, Waseda Y, Kitamura K, Kagaya T, Seike T, et al. Lidocaine spray alone is similar to spray plus viscous solution for pharyngeal observation during transoral endoscopy: a clinical randomized trial. Endosc Int Open. 2017;5:E47-53.

Mizuno Y, Hikichi T, Itabashi M. A comparative study of the effect and discomfort produced by pharyngeal anesthesia with viscous lidocaine solution and with lidocaine spray in esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Fukushima Med J. 2011;61:12-7.

Saravanan RB, Malarvizhi M, Hemamala, Safique, Radha, Arvind J, et al. An open label comparative study between xylocaine lozenges and xylocaine spray in patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in a tertiary care center. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2011;30:A101-5.

Rerknimitr R, Akaraviputh T, Ratanachu-Ek T, Kongkam P, Pausawasdi N, Pisespongsa P. Current Status of GI Endoscopy in Thailand and Thai Association of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (TAGE). Siriraj Med J [internet]. 2018 Oct. 31 [cited 2025 Sep. 4];70(5):476-8. available from: https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/sirirajmedj/article/view/152789

Kongkam P, Mekaroonkamol P, Pausawasdi APN, Ratanachu-ek T, Rerknimitr PR, Taweerutchana V, et al. Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty in the Armamentarium of Bariatric Treatment in Thailand: A TAGE-TSMBS Joint Addendum Statement to TSMBS Consensus Guideline. Siriraj Med J [internet]. 2021 Mar. 31 [cited 2025 Sep. 4];73(5):289-92. available from: https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/sirirajmedj/article/view/250280

Peery AF, Dellon ES, Lund J, Crockett SD, McGowan CE, Bulsiewicz WJ, et al. Burden of gastrointestinal disease in the United States: 2012 update. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:1179-87.e3.

Tsai HI, Tsai YF, Liou SC, Su MY, Lin CC, Chang CJ, et al. The questionable efficacy of topical pharyngeal anesthesia in combination with propofol sedation in gastroscopy. Dig Dis Sci. 2012;57:2519-26.

Smith JL, Opekun A, Graham DY. Controlled comparison of topical anesthetic agents in flexible upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1985;31:255-8.

Mogensen S, Treldal C, Feldager E, Pulis S, Jacobsen J, Andersen O, et al. New lidocaine lozenge as topical anesthesia compared to lidocaine viscous oral solution before upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Local Reg Anesth. 2012;5:17-22.

Korttila K, Tarkkanen J, Tarkkanen L. Comparison of laryngotracheal and ultrasonic nebulizer administration of lidocaine in local anaesthesia for bronchoscopy. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1981;25:161-5.

Davies AE, Kidd D, Stone SP, MacMahon J. Pharyngeal sensation and gag reflex in healthy subjects. Lancet. 1995;345:487-8.

Pound DC, O'Connor KW, Brown ED, Weddle R, McHenry R, Crabb D, et al. Oral medications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy using a small diameter endoscope. Gastrointest Endosc. 1988;34:327-31.

Ladas SD, Raptis SA. Selection of patients for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy without sedation-the finger-throat test. Ital J Gastroenterol. 1986;18:162-5.

Pereira S, Hussaini SH, Hanson PJ, Wilkinson ML, Sladen GE. Endoscopy: throat spray or sedation? J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1994;28:411-4.

Hedenbro JL, Ekelund M, Aberg T, Lindblom A. Oral sedation for diagnostic upper endoscopy. Endoscopy. 1991;23:8-1