ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT06792474Updated Nov 24, 2025

Influence of Lidocaine Infusion on Motor Evoked Potential Thresholds

A Phase 4 interventional study of Lidocaine in Saline and Normal saline in Spinal Disease, Anesthesia and Post Operative Pain, sponsored by Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-11-24.

Sponsored by Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center · Phase 4, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
44
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of lidocaine infusion on intraoperative neuromonitoring in patients undergoing spine surgery.

Read the detailed description

The investigators will compare the stimulation threshold for motor evoked potentials (MEPs) for patients undergoing spine surgery with intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring (IONM) who receive a lidocaine infusion vs. normal saline (NS) infusion. The endpoint for this objective will be the final stimulation threshold for MEPs at the end of the surgery. The stimulation threshold for MEPs is a commonly used metric to determine the effects of anesthetic agents on MEP signals. Secondary objectives will somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) with an endpoint of amplitude and latency of SSEPs throughout the surgery. Other secondary outcomes will include, intraoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP), intraoperative propofol consumptions, and post-operative visual analog scale (VAS) and opioid consumption.

02

Conditions studied

  • Spinal Disease
  • Anesthesia
  • Post Operative Pain

Keywords

  • Lidocaine
  • Intraoperative Neuromonitoring
  • Spine surgery
  • Post Operative Pain
03

In context

Spinal Diseases

174 studies on the registry are indexed under Spinal Diseases; 39 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 44 is below the median of 60 across 106 interventional studies indexed under Spinal Diseases.

Browse Spinal Diseases studies →

Lead sponsor

Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center is the lead sponsor of 488 studies on the registry; 71 are open to participants now.

Of its 31 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 21 (68%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients undergoing elective cervical or thoracolumbar spine surgery with intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Inability to provide in English
  • Pregnancy (based on patient report or a positive test on the day of surgery)
  • to lidocaine
  • Planned post-operative intubation
  • Current incarceration
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator)
Enrollment
44 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Lidocaine Infusion (Active)

    Lidocaine infusion

    Drug: Lidocaine in Saline

  • Sham comparator
    Normal Saline Infusion (Sham)

    Normal saline infusion

    Drug: Normal saline

Interventions

  • DrugLidocaine in Saline

    Lidocaine infusion 1.5 mg/kg/hr

    Also known as: Active

  • DrugNormal saline

    Normal saline infusion

    Also known as: Placebo

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs)

    An endpoint of the final stimulation threshold for MEPs at the end of surgery.

    Time frame: Duration of the surgical procedure, no more than 24 hours

Secondary outcomes

  1. Somatosensory Evoked Potentials (SSEPs)

    Endpoints of amplitude and latency throughout the surgery of SSEPs

    Time frame: Duration of the surgical procedure, no more than 24 hours

  2. Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)

    Intraoperative incidence of MAP \<65 mmHg and MAP \< 55 mmHg

    Time frame: Duration of the surgical procedure, no more than 24 hours

  3. Intraoperative propofol consumption

    Rate of propofol consumption between the arms

    Time frame: Duration of the surgical procedure, no more than 24 hours

  4. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Scores

    Endpoint of VAS pain scores post operative days (POD) 0/1/3

    Time frame: Post-operative day 0 through 3

  5. Opiod consumption

    Opiod consumption converted to morphine equivalents through post operative day (POD) 3

    Time frame: Post-operative day 0 through 3

07

Study locations

1 site
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Sloan TB, Mongan P, Lyda C, Koht A. Lidocaine infusion adjunct to total intravenous anesthesia reduces the total dose of propofol during intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. J Clin Monit Comput. 2014 Apr;28(2):139-47. doi: 10.1007/s10877-013-9506-x. Epub 2013 Aug 31. PubMed 23996498 ↗
  • Urban MK, Fields K, Donegan SW, Beathe JC, Pinter DW, Boachie-Adjei O, Emerson RG. A randomized crossover study of the effects of lidocaine on motor- and sensory-evoked potentials during spinal surgery. Spine J. 2017 Dec;17(12):1889-1896. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.06.024. Epub 2017 Jun 27. PubMed 28666848 ↗
  • Dunn LK, Durieux ME. Perioperative Use of Intravenous Lidocaine. Anesthesiology. 2017 Apr;126(4):729-737. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001527. No abstract available. PubMed 28114177 ↗
  • Leliefeld PH, Wessels CM, Leenen LP, Koenderman L, Pillay J. The role of neutrophils in immune dysfunction during severe inflammation. Crit Care. 2016 Mar 23;20:73. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1250-4. PubMed 27005275 ↗
  • Karnina R, Arif SK, Hatta M, Bukhari A. Molecular mechanisms of lidocaine. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2021 Aug 17;69:102733. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102733. eCollection 2021 Sep. PubMed 34457261 ↗
  • Hollmann MW, Herroeder S, Kurz KS, Hoenemann CW, Struemper D, Hahnenkamp K, Durieux ME. Time-dependent inhibition of G protein-coupled receptor signaling by local anesthetics. Anesthesiology. 2004 Apr;100(4):852-60. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200404000-00015. PubMed 15087620 ↗
  • Dewinter G, Moens P, Fieuws S, Vanaudenaerde B, Van de Velde M, Rex S. Systemic lidocaine fails to improve postoperative morphine consumption, postoperative recovery and quality of life in patients undergoing posterior spinal arthrodesis. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Br J Anaesth. 2017 Apr 1;118(4):576-585. doi: 10.1093/bja/aex038. PubMed 28403408 ↗
  • Farag E, Ghobrial M, Sessler DI, Dalton JE, Liu J, Lee JH, Zaky S, Benzel E, Bingaman W, Kurz A. Effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine administration on pain, opioid consumption, and quality of life after complex spine surgery. Anesthesiology. 2013 Oct;119(4):932-40. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318297d4a5. PubMed 23681143 ↗
  • Schubert A, Licina MG, Glaze GM, Paranandi L. Systemic lidocaine and human somatosensory-evoked potentials during sufentanil-isoflurane anaesthesia. Can J Anaesth. 1992 Jul;39(6):569-75. doi: 10.1007/BF03008320. PubMed 1386560 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 24, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06792474
Responsible party
Lauren K. Buhl (Principal Investigator, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jan 24, 2025
Start date
Aug 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Aug 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Aug 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Nov 24, 2025

Study contacts

Lauren K Buhl, MD, PhD
Contact
lauren.k.buhl@hitchcock.org
603-650-5922

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Nov 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion