Comparing Effect of Opioid-sparing Versus Conventional Anesthesia on Quality of Recovery After Emergency Laparotomy

Comparing Effect of Opioid-sparing Versus Conventional Anesthesia on Quality of Recovery After Emergency Laparotomy: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Aim of the Work The investigators aim to compare lidocaine-based anesthesia versus conventional anesthesia in the presence of multimodal analgesia protocol in terms of early quality of recovery and analgesic efficacy.

Objectives To compare quality of recovery using the Quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) score between lidocaine-based anesthesia in relation to conventional anesthesia in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy.

Hypothesis the investigators hypothesize that lidocaine-based regimen would be effective in reducing opioid use and provide superior quality of recovery compared to conventional opioid-routine anesthesia in emergency laparotomy.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Adult patients (18-65 years)
• ASA I-III undergoing emergency laparotomy with midline incision.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Severe cardiac morbidities (impaired contractility with ejection fraction < 45%, heart block, arrhythmias, tight valvular lesions) and patients on beta-blockers

• Patients on vasopressor infusion, patients with high shock index (heart rate / systolic blood pressure >1)

• Body mass index <18 or > 35 Kg/m2,

  • Pregnant or lactating women,