Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 42339818

Impact of oliceridine versus sufentanil on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing thyroid surgery: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

Feng Liu·Wang Shen·Dan Su·Zhaoming Guan·Yi Zhang·Siyu Li·Qisong Yuan·Yupeng Zhao·Jixiong Sun·Hongwei Fang·Longqiu Yang
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

PURPOSE: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication following thyroid surgery, often exacerbated by opioid use. Oliceridine, a novel G protein-biased μ-opioid receptor agonist, may reduce opioid-related adverse events. This study aimed to compare the impact of oliceridine versus sufentanil on the incidence and severity of PONV in patients undergoing thyroid surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled trial conducted between May 2025 and February 2026, 232 patients scheduled for thyroid surgery were randomly assigned to receive either oliceridine or sufentanil for intraoperative analgesia. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV during the first 48 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included PONV severity, need for rescue anti-emetics, postoperative pain scores, recovery quality, and other adverse events. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV within 48 h postoperatively was significantly lower in the oliceridine group [13/107 (12%)] compared with the sufentanil group [31/110 (28%)] (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.72, p = 0.006). Postoperative pain scores, rescue analgesia requirements, and Quality of Recovery-15 scores were comparable between the two groups (p > 0.05). Besides, exploratory unadjusted analyses revealed fewer rescue anti-emetics: O group 8/107 (8%) vs S group 25/110 (23%) (OR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.64, p = 0.002); and less abdominal distension: O group 4/107 (4%) vs S group 19/110 (17%) (OR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.06-0.57, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: For young ASA I-II patients undergoing thyroid surgery, oliceridine yields adequate postoperative analgesia and lower PONV rates versus sufentanil. Additional trials involving high-intensity surgical procedures are needed to confirm consistent equivalence.

Explore related subjects

HumansSufentanilDouble-Blind MethodPostoperative Nausea and VomitingProspective StudiesFemaleMaleAnalgesics, OpioidPostoperative PainMiddle AgedAdultThyroidectomyThyroid GlandIncidenceAntiemeticsSpiro CompoundsThiophenesOliceridineopioid-related adverse eventspostoperative nausea and vomitingsufentanilthyroid surgeryJournal ArticleRandomized Controlled TrialComparative StudyResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Feng Liu, Wang Shen, Dan Su, Zhaoming Guan, Yi Zhang, Siyu Li, Qisong Yuan, Yupeng Zhao, Jixiong Sun, Hongwei Fang, Longqiu Yang. 2026-06-24. Impact of oliceridine versus sufentanil on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing thyroid surgery: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2026.2690695

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial; Comparative Study; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't resourceAdult subjectAnalgesics, Opioid subjectAntiemetics subjectComparative Study subjectDouble-Blind Method subjectFemale subjectHumans subjectIncidence subjectJournal Article subjectMale subjectMiddle Aged subjectOliceridine subjectRandomized controlled trials studyopioid-related adverse events subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Esketamine vs. sufentanil for quality of recovery after outpatient gynecological surgery: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative administration of esketamine has been reported to improve early quality of recovery (QoR). However, data on its effects in outpatient surgery are limited. This study aimed to assess the impact of esketamine on QoR in patients undergoing outpatient gynecological procedures. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomized clinical trial, patients aged 18-65&#x2009;years scheduled for outpatient gynecological surgery under sedation were allocated to receive esketamine (0.2&#x2009;mg/kg) or sufentanil (0.1&#x2009;&#x3bc;g/kg) combined with propofol (1.5-3&#x2009;mg/kg). The primary outcome was quality of recovery on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes included quality of recovery on POD2, sedation success rate, length of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, injection pain, postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, patient and clinician satisfaction, sleep quality, and anxiety and depression. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were randomized, with 63 assigned to the esketamine group and 63 to the sufentanil group. Of these, 125 patients were included in the final analysis (62 in the esketamine group and 63 in the sufentanil group), as one patient lacked follow-up data. The mean (SD) QoR-15 score on POD1 was 137.9 (14.5) in the esketamine group and 137.8 (10.7) in the sufentanil group, with no significant difference between groups (absolute difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -4.2 to 4.6; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.93). For secondary outcomes, the esketamine group had a longer PACU stay (median, 28.0 vs. 23.0&#x2009;min; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001), a lower incidence of severe injection pain (22.6% vs. 50.8%; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.002), a higher proportion of patients with pain scores &#x2265; 4 at 30&#x2009;min postoperatively (30.6% vs. 6.3%; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.001), and higher fatigue scores (median, 3.0 vs. 2.0; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.01). Other secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing sedation for outpatient gynecological procedures, esketamine did not significantly improve quality of recovery on POD1 compared to sufentanil. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2500098466.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Chinese herbal medicine Xiangsu Hewei Granules in treating non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease with liver stomach stagnation heat syndrome: A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Xiangsu Hewei Granules are an herbal preparation that has shown potential for controlling symptoms of nonerosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (NERD) in preliminary studies. However, high-quality randomized controlled evidence for its use in NERD remains lacking. AIM: To verify the efficacy and safety of Xiangsu Hewei Granules in treating NERD with liver stomach stagnation heat syndrome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase III trial included 480 patients (aged 18-65 years) with confirmed NERD (GerdQ&#x2265;8; negative H. pylori) and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) liver stomach stagnation heat syndrome. Patients were randomized 3:1 to receive either Xiangsu Hewei Granules or placebo, thrice daily for 8 weeks. The primary outcomes were the effective rate of the response based on visual analog scale (VAS) scores for heartburn and acid regurgitation at week 8. The secondary outcomes included reductions in the TCM syndrome score, etc. RESULTS: 479 participants (mean age 48.5 years, SD10.2; 54.3% female) entered the full analysis set and safety set (360 tests group; 119 control group, 1 participant in the control group withdrawing before medication). At week 8, compared with the control group, the test group demonstrated significantly better effective rate of VAS score response for heartburn(76.39% vs 21.01%, 95% CI 55.38 (45.98, 62.94) %, p&#x202f;<&#x202f;0.01),acid regurgitation (79.72% vs 23.53%, 95% CI56.39 (46.90, 64.12) %, p&#x202f;<&#x202f;0.01), and TCM syndrome score (69.23% vs 30.13%, p&#x202f;<&#x202f;0.01) at week 8. CONCLUSION: In this selected population of NERD patients with liver-stomach stagnation heat syndrome (e.g., negative H. pylori, no pH-impedance phenotype, and low anxiety/depression scores), Xiangsu Hewei Granules demonstrated efficacy and safety in improving heartburn, acid regurgitation, and TCM syndrome scores. However, generalizability to the broader NERD population and its comparative effectiveness against standard proton pump inhibitor therapy require further investigation.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

CoLchicine for Treatment of OsteoArthritis of the Knee (CLOAK): Clinical and biochemical outcomes from a three-month double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) causes pain and progressive disability, but pharmacologic treatments are limited. Colchicine inhibits inflammation that might modulate KOA, but efficacy trials have yielded mixed results. We tested whether colchicine, without concurrent NSAIDs, improved KOA pain, function, synovial effusion size, and OA-associated inflammatory serum biomarkers. METHODS: Participants with symptomatic KOA and radiographic Kellgren-Lawrence grades 2/3 were randomized to receive three months of daily colchicine or placebo in a double-blind manner, with no concurrent NSAID use. The primary outcome was between-group change in visual analog score (VAS) for index knee pain. Secondary outcomes included changes in Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS), size (depth in millimeters) of sonographically-identified effusions, acetaminophen use, and changes in OA-related serum biomarkers. RESULTS: From baseline to end of study of 120 enrolled participants, no significant differences were observed in improvement of VAS pain, KOOS scores or effusion size. Subsets of participants with more severe VAS pain, worse radiographic disease, or higher hsCRP or serum urate levels at baseline also showed no significant clinical benefit from colchicine compared to placebo. In contrast to the clinical outcomes, colchicine treatment was associated with significant or trending improvement in multiple OA-related serum biomarkers including hsCRP and &#x3b2;-NGF (p < 0.05) and PGE2, IL-1ra, IL-8, and VEGF (p < 0.16). CONCLUSION: This double-blind placebo-controlled trial of colchicine for KOA failed to demonstrate improvement in pain, function, or synovial effusion size in comparison to placebo at three months. Early improvement in OA-associated inflammatory biomarkers suggests a possible longer-term clinical benefit. Clinical Trials Registration No NCT03913442.

Humans↗