Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 42723442

Effects of Esketamine on Postoperative Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Scores in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Radical Resection for Colorectal Cancer.

Lindai He·Zhihua Sun·Qulian Guo·E Wang·Longyan Li·Shenxiayu Li
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of intravenous esketamine on postoperative Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical resection for colorectal cancer. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled study, adult patients for elective laparoscopic radical resection were randomly assigned (1:1) to a control group (group C) or an esketamine group (group PE). Group C received conventional general anesthesia and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA). In group PE, esketamine 0.5&#x2009;mg/kg was injected during induction of anesthesia, with esketamine 1&#x2009;mg/kg added to PCIA. Primary outcome was HADS score on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes included HADS scores on postoperative days 3 and 7, sleep quality scores, postoperative level of consciousness, complication rate, length of hospital stay, 24&#x2009;h inflammatory factors, and satisfaction scores. RESULTS: Group PE showed significantly lower HADS-A and HADS-D scores on postoperative days 1 and 3 , reduced 24&#x2009;h interleukin-6 (IL-6) leveland higher patient satisfaction compared with group C (all p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Esketamine given during induction and in PCIA reduced early-stage postoperative HADS scores and improved patient satisfaction in colorectal cancer patients.

Explore related subjects

HumansColorectal NeoplasmsLaparoscopyFemaleMaleAnxietyProspective StudiesMiddle AgedDepressionAgedKetamineLength of StayAnalgesia, Patient-ControlledPatient SatisfactionPostoperative ComplicationsAdultAnesthesia, GeneralInterleukin-6Colorectal Surgical ProceduresElective Surgical ProceduresColectomyEsketaminecolorectal cancer surgeryhospital anxiety and depression scaleinflammationJournal ArticleRandomized Controlled Trial

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Lindai He, Zhihua Sun, Qulian Guo, E Wang, Longyan Li, Shenxiayu Li. 2026-09-11. Effects of Esketamine on Postoperative Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Scores in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Radical Resection for Colorectal Cancer.. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941939.2026.2712673

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

Discover connections

Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial resourceAdult subjectAged subjectAnalgesia, Patient-Controlled subjectAnesthesia, General subjectAnxiety subjectColectomy subjectColorectal Neoplasms subjectColorectal Surgical Procedures subjectDepression subjectElective Surgical Procedures subjectEsketamine subjectFemale subjectHumans subjectInterleukin-6 subjectJournal Article subject

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Comparison of VCV and PCV-VG modes on diaphragmatic function in diabetic patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic patients are prone to induce diaphragmatic weakness, which can lead to postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). The optimal mechanical ventilation mode may potentially improve postoperative diaphragmatic function. This study evaluates the effects of two ventilation modes under driving pressure-guided ventilation strategy on diaphragmatic function, as assessed by diaphragm thickening fraction (DTF) and diaphragm excursion (DE), in diabetic patients following laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Eighty patients diagnosed with Type II diabetes scheduled for elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery, were randomly allocated to either the pressure-controlled volume-guaranteed ventilation (PCV-VG) group (Group P) or the volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) group (Group V) during surgery. The primary outcome was diaphragmatic function assessed during both tidal breathing and maximal inspiratory effort after surgery. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative mechanical power, PPCs, and other complications. RESULTS: A total of eighty patients were included in the final analysis. The averaged area under the curve (AUC) for mechanical power during ventilation was significantly lower in Group P than in Group V (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.002). PCV-VG significantly improved both DE and DTF within the first two days post-surgery (AUCDEtidal: p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.088, AUCDTFtidal: p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.004, AUCDEmax: p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.029, AUCDTFmax: p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.017). Postoperative diaphragmatic weakness was less frequent in Group P than in Group V (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.019). However, there was no difference in the incidence of PPCs between the two groups (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.155). CONCLUSION: PCV-VG mode can reduce intraoperative mechanical power, better preserve postoperative diaphragmatic function. However, these improvements did not translate into clinical benefits, as evidenced by the lack of reduction in the incidence of PPCs.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Beyond predictive performance: A systematic review and critical methodological appraisal of AI/ML and conventional modelling strategies in breast, colorectal, and pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Predictive modelling for cancer risk, treatment-related complications, and survival is central to precision oncology. Conventional logistic regression (LR) and Cox proportional hazards (CoxPH) regression remain widely used but are limited when modelling nonlinear interactions, high-dimensional imaging features, and multimodal clinical-metabolic predictors. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) methods offer expanded capability through automated feature extraction, ensemble learning, and flexible survival modelling, but the evidence on when AI/ML adds value over conventional models across cancer sites and predictive tasks remains fragmented. OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the methodological performance, validation strategies, and translational limitations of AI/ML models compared with conventional statistical models in published predictive-modelling studies for breast, colorectal, or pancreatic cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between January 2019 and March 2025. Two reviewers independently conducted title-and-abstract screening, full-text eligibility assessment, and PROBAST risk-of-bias assessment. Sixty-five studies (n&#xa0;=&#xa0;907,567 participants) were narratively synthesised by cancer site, predictive task, model family, comparator, validation strategy, predictor modality, and calibration or explainability reporting. RESULTS: The 65 studies comprised breast cancer (n&#xa0;=&#xa0;35), colorectal cancer (n&#xa0;=&#xa0;21), and pancreatic cancer (n&#xa0;=&#xa0;9). AI/ML superiority over LR and CoxPH was task- and data-dependent. CNN- and U-Net-based models predominated in imaging and body-composition tasks, tree-based ensembles consistently outperformed LR for tabular perioperative complication prediction, and CoxPH remained competitive, and in the largest pancreatic risk study, superior to XGBoost (C-index 0.802 vs 0.723) in well-structured datasets. PROBAST analysis-domain risk was moderate in 54 of 65 studies (83%), driven by limited external validation, sparse calibration reporting (11/65), and few decision-curve analyses (7/65). CONCLUSION: AI/ML adds the most methodological value in imaging-derived feature extraction and nonlinear perioperative prediction, while conventional regression remains preferable in large, structured datasets with linear predictors. Clinical translation requires standardised body-composition definitions, external validation, calibration assessment, decision-curve analysis, and explainability, in line with TRIPOD+AI and CLAIM standards.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Randomized phase-II trial of surufatinib plus FOLFOX/FOLFIRI versus FOLFOXIRI as second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) typically involves oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based doublet chemotherapy with or without anti-angiogenic antibodies. Triplet regimens such as FOLFOXIRI have demonstrated synergy and improved efficacy as first-line therapy. Surufatinib, an oral multi-kinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR1-3, FGFR1, and CSF-1R, may enhance chemotherapy efficacy. We evaluated surufatinib combined with doublet (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) versus triplet (FOLFOXIRI) chemotherapy as second-line treatment for mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicentre, open-label, randomized phase-II trial used Simon's minimax two-stage design. Eligible patients had mCRC progressing on or within 6&#x2009;months after first-line doublet chemotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to surufatinib 250&#x2009;mg once daily plus either mFOLFOX6/FOLFIRI (doublet cohort, selected based on prior regimen) or FOLFOXIRI (triplet cohort). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: From September 2021 to November 2023, 57 patients were randomized (28 per cohort after one withdrawal). In the doublet cohort, ORR was 35.7% (95% CI: 18.6-55.9), median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.4&#x2009;months (95% CI: 3.8-7.0), and median overall survival (OS) was 19.0&#x2009;months (95% CI: 9.2-28.8). In the triplet cohort, ORR was 39.3% (95% CI: 21.5-59.4), median PFS was 5.8&#x2009;months (95% CI: 3.3-8.2), and median OS was 10.9&#x2009;months (95% CI: 6.0-15.8). Grade &#x2265;3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred more frequently in the triplet (71.4%) versus doublet (57.1%) cohort, with higher rates of treatment delays (89.3% versus 72.0%) and discontinuations (25.0% versus 14.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Surufatinib plus doublet chemotherapy showed encouraging antitumor activity and acceptable tolerability in second-line mCRC, warranting further evaluation in a larger randomized trial. In contrast, surufatinib plus triplet chemotherapy was associated with increased toxicity, more frequent treatment delays or discontinuations, and shorter overall survival; this combination is not recommended for further investigation in this setting.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04734249Date of registration: January 31, 2021.

Humans↗