Maciej Kaszyński

Dr. Maciej Kaszyński

Paediatric Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Mazowieckie, Poland
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
5 January 2021 in BMC Anesthesiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MKMaciej Kaszyński
Maciej Kaszyński
DLDorota Lewandowska
Dorota Lewandowska
PSPiotr Sawicki
Piotr Sawicki
PWPiotr Wojcieszak
Piotr Wojcieszak
IPIzabela Pągowska-Klimek
Izabela Pągowska-Klimek
Intravenous lidocaine, a potent local anesthetic with analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties, has been shown to be an effective adjunct that reduces intra- and postoperative opioid consumption and facilitates pain management in adults. While it shows promise for use in the pediatric population, limited evidence is available. Objectives: To determine if general anesthesia with intraoperative intravenous lidocaine infusion versus general anesthesia without intravenous lidocaine infusion in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy decreased opioid requirements intra- and postoperatively. Design: A single-center parallel single-masked randomized controlled study. A computer-generated blocked randomization list was used to allocate participants. The study was conducted between March 2019 and January 2020. Setting: Pediatric teaching hospital in Poland. Participants: Seventy-four patients aged between 18 months and 18 years undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. Seventy-one patients fulfilled the study requirements. Intervention: Intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg over 5 min before induction of anesthesia followed by lidocaine infusion at 1.5 mg/kg/h intraoperatively. The infusion was discontinued before the patients’ transfer to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Primary outcome measure: The primary outcome measure was total nalbuphine requirement in milligrams during the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcome measures: The secondary outcome measures were intraoperative fentanyl consumption, intraoperative sevoflurane consumption, time to the first rescue analgesic request, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting during the first 24 h after surgery, frequency of side effects of lidocaine. Results: Children (n = 74) aged 5–17 randomly allocated to receive intraoperative lidocaine infusion (n = 37) or no intervention (n = 37). Seventy-one were included in the analysis (35 in the study group and 36 in the control group). There was no difference in the cumulative dose of nalbuphine in the first 24 h after removal of the endotracheal tube between groups [median of 0.1061 (IQR: 0.0962–0.2222) mg/kg in the lidocaine group, compared to the control group median of 0.1325 (IQR: 0.0899–0.22020) mg/kg, p = 0.63]. Intraoperative fentanyl consumption was lower in the lidocaine group [median of 5.091 (IQR: 4.848–5.714) μg/kg] than in the control group [median of 5.969 (IQR: 5.000–6.748), p = 0.03]. Taking into account the additional doses administered based on clinical indications, the reduction in the requirement for fentanyl in the lidocaine group was even greater [median of 0.0 (IQR: 0.0–0.952) vs 0.99 (IQR: 0.0–1.809) μg/kg, p = 0.01]. No difference was observed in the sevoflurane consumption between the two groups [median of 32.5 ml (IQR 25.0–43.0) in the lidocaine group vs median of 35.0 ml (IQR: 23.5–46.0) in the control group, p = 0.56]. The time to first analgesic request in the lidocaine group was prolonged [median of 55 (IQR: 40–110) min in the lidocaine group vs median of 40.5 (IQR: 28–65) min in the control group, p = 0.05]. There was no difference in the frequency of PONV between the two groups (48.57% in the lidocaine group vs 61.11% in the control group, p = 0.29). No lidocaine related incidence of anaphylaxis, systemic toxicity, circulatory disturbances or neurological impairment was reported, during anesthesia or postoperative period. Conclusions: Intraoperative systemic lidocaine administration reduced the intraoperative requirement for opioids in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. This effect was time limited, and hence did not affect opioid consumption in the first 24 h following discontinuation of lidocaine infusion. Trial registration: NCT03886896.

18 August 2022 in Scientific Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MKMaciej Kaszyński
Maciej Kaszyński
BSBarbara Stankiewicz
Barbara Stankiewicz
KPKrzysztof Jakub Pałko
Krzysztof Jakub Pałko
MDMarek Darowski
Marek Darowski
IPIzabela Pągowska-Klimek
Izabela Pągowska-Klimek
We assessed the influence of systemic lidocaine administration on ventilatory and circulatory parameters, and the pneumoperitoneum impact on the cardiopulmonary system during a laparoscopic appendectomy in children. A single-center parallel single-masked randomized controlled study was carried out with 58 patients (3–17 years). Intravenous lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg/kg over 5 min before induction of anesthesia followed by lidocaine infusion at 1.5 mg/kg/h intraoperatively. Respiratory system compliance (C, C/kg), Ppeak-PEEP and Pulse rate (Pulse), systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure (NBPs, NBPd, NBPm), assessed in the Lidocaine and Control group, at the: beginning (P1), minimum lung compliance (P2) and at the end of surgery (P3) were compared. The respiratory/hemodynamic parameters did not differ between the groups at any stage of operation. Blood Pressure and Ppeak-PEEP were significantly higher at the P2 compared to P1 and P3 stages (P < 0.001, 1 − β ≥ 0.895) that correlated with lung compliance changes: C/kg vs. NBPs and Ppeak-PEEP (− 0.42, − 0.84; P < 0.001); C vs. Pulse and Ppeak-PEEP (− 0.48, − 0.46; P < 0.001). Although an increase in intraabdominal pressure up to 12(15) mmHg causes significant changes in hemodynamic/respiratory parameters, there appears to be no risk of fatal reactions in 1E, 2E ASA patients. Systemic lidocaine administration doesn’t alleviate circulatory/respiratory alterations during pneumoperitoneum. No lidocaine related episode of anaphylaxis, systemic toxicity, circulatory disturbances or neurological impairment occurred.ClinicalTrials.gov: 22/03/2019.Trial registration number: NCT03886896.

10 January 2025 in BMC Anesthesiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MKMaciej Kaszyński
Maciej Kaszyński
AKAlicja Kuczerowska
Alicja Kuczerowska
JPJustyna Pietrzyk
Justyna Pietrzyk
PSPiotr Sawicki
Piotr Sawicki
PWPaweł Witt
Paweł Witt
IPIzabela Pągowska-Klimek
Izabela Pągowska-Klimek
Lidocaine, a widely used local anaesthetic, also serves as an adjuvant in pain management. However, its use in children is off-label. This study aimed to determine if intravenous lidocaine alleviates the haemodynamic, metabolic, and hormonal responses to intubation and laparoscopic surgery in children. A single-centre, parallel, double-masked, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. 132 patients, aged 18 months to 18 years, with no contraindications to lidocaine administration and qualified for laparoscopic appendectomy were enrolled. The intervention studied was a lidocaine bolus of 1.5 mg⋅kg− 1 over 5 min given before induction of anaesthesia, followed by intraoperative lidocaine infusion at 1.5 mg⋅kg− 1⋅h− 1 intraoperatively. Patients in the control group were administered a placebo. Mean arterial pressure, glucose, cortisol, lidocaine blood levels, lidocaine-related side effects, and intraoperative opioid requirements were analysed. 132 participants completed the trial. The number of patients who experienced an excessive cardiovascular response to induction of anaesthesia or intubation was 23 (37%) in the control group and 21 (34%) in the lidocaine group (p = 0.707). No statistically significant difference was found between the control and lidocaine groups in the hormonal and metabolic responses, as well as intraoperative fentanyl requirements. Serum lidocaine levels remained below the toxic threshold in all patients. Although the studied intervention appears to be safe, with no clinical side effects observed and serum lidocaine levels remaining below the toxic threshold, its intraoperative administration is not recommended, as it does not demonstrate any significant benefit during the anaesthesia period when compared to placebo. NCT05238506. The date of first registration: 14/02/2022.

21 June 2022 in Anaesthesiology Intensive Therapy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MKMaciej Kaszyński
Maciej Kaszyński
PRPiotr Rzetelski
Piotr Rzetelski
IPIzabela Pągowska-Klimek
Izabela Pągowska-Klimek

26 October 2020 in Anaesthesiology Intensive Therapy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MKMaciej Kaszyński
Maciej Kaszyński
JDJarosław M. Deszczyński
Jarosław M. Deszczyński
IPIzabela Pągowska-Klimek
Izabela Pągowska-Klimek
Choosing the right anaesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia after major surgery can be a great challenge for paediatric anaesthetists, especially when younger children are concerned. The simultaneous use of systemic analgesics with adjuncts in combination with single-shot blocks performed at the right time may facilitate the patient’s recovery and result in a comfortable postoperative period.

22 October 2025 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MKMaciej Kaszyński
Maciej Kaszyński
BSBarbara Stankiewicz
Barbara Stankiewicz
AKAleksandra Kalicka
Aleksandra Kalicka
KMKarolina Mikołap
Karolina Mikołap
MOMonika Olszanecka
Monika Olszanecka
IPIzabela Pągowska-Klimek
Izabela Pągowska-Klimek
Background: Opioids remain the most effective component of systemic analgesia and are considered safe and beneficial when administered at the lowest effective dose. Nevertheless, their potential adverse effects may diminish the quality of the postoperative period or, in some cases, lead to life-threatening complications. This analysis examines whether the mandatory implementation of a standardised protocol offers opioid-sparing potential. Methods: In this single-centre retrospective cohort study, intraoperative opioid consumption during laparoscopic appendectomy was compared between patients anaesthetised according to a standardised protocol (n1 = 132) and those managed at clinicians’ discretion in line with good medical practice (n2 = 212). Length of hospital stay and use of intraoperative non-opioid analgesics were also assessed. Results: The total fentanyl dose administered during anaesthesia was significantly lower in the standardised protocol cohort compared to the cohort without a protocol: 3.13 μg·kg−1 (IQR: 2.98–4.08) vs. 5.19 μg·kg−1 (IQR: 3.89–6.67), p < 0.001. In the protocol cohort, the percentage of patients who received acetaminophen and metamizole was significantly higher—increasing by 57% and 23%, respectively (p < 0.001). No significant inter-cohort difference was observed in terms of length of hospital stay. Conclusions: The use of a mandatory anaesthetic protocol based on a multimodal approach had an opioid-sparing effect in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. This retrospective analysis was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medical University of Warsaw (identifier: AKBE/118/2025; date of acceptance: 12 May 2025), and the primary trial was registered in the U.S. National Library of Medicine Clinical Trials Registry (registration number: NCT05238506; date of first registration: 14 February 2022).