SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

9 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Effects of erector spinae plane block on postoperative pain in patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction for breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy causes acute pain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a single-shot T5 erector spinae plane block (ESPB) reduces postoperative pain. DESIGN: Single-center, RCT with allocation concealment; blinded assessors and statisticians. SETTING: Tertiary cancer center in China. PATIENTS: 100 adults scheduled for radical mastectomy with implant reconstruction were randomized (1:1); follow-up complete. INTERVENTION: Before induction, ESPB was given under ultrasound guidance at T5 with 30 mL of 0.375% ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg; controls received no block. Standardized general anesthesia and postoperative PCA for both groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Resting NRS at 6 h (MCID=1). Secondary outcomes were opioid consumption, quality of recovery, and PONV. RESULTS: ESPB did not significantly reduce resting pain at 6 h at the median (τ =0.50; adjusted difference -0.9; p = 0.08). At the upper tail, pain intensity was lower (τ = 0.75; -1.8; p <0.01). Repeated measures provided additional time-point information, improving estimation precision and test sensitivity. ESPB get lower pain scores at 6, 12, and 24 hours (all p <0.01). But, the 95% CI includes the MCID, the clinical benefit remains uncertain. Opioid use decreased at 24 h (-13.5 mg; p <0.01) and 48 h (-6.6 mg; p <0.01). Quality of recovery improved at 24 h (difference 5 points; p <0.01), but not later. No differences were observed in intraoperative hemodynamics or PONV. CONCLUSIONS: Single-shot T5 ESPB with perineural dexmedetomidine may reduce postoperative pain and opioid requirements and improve early recovery. Further large trials are warranted. Clinical relevance remains to be confirmed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06143020.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Yoga MAT: A factorial randomized study using the Multiphase Optimization Strategy to develop a multicomponent yoga intervention for people with chronic pain taking medications for opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND: People taking medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) commonly experience chronic pain. Yoga interventions show promise for decreasing pain-related disability in other populations. More time spent in yoga practice may improve pain-related outcomes. METHODS: The Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST) provided the framework for developing an optimized yoga intervention package. In a 2x2x2x2 factorial experiment, we evaluated four candidate intervention components which, when added to a weekly yoga class, might increase yoga engagement. The primary outcome was minutes per week of yoga practice (classes and other yoga practice) over the 12-week intervention period. We sought to determine which combination of intervention components was associated with the most yoga practice for people with chronic pain taking buprenorphine or methadone as MOUD. RESULTS: We enrolled 192 adults. There was a significant main effect for Component "B" (having two private sessions with a yoga teachers; IRR = 1.10, 90%CI 1.02; 1.18), and a synergistic interaction between Components "B" and "D" (D was financial incentives for attending class; IRR = 1.11, 90%CI 1.02; 1.19). This combination of these two components (without other potential components) was associated with the second highest model-predicted mean minutes of yoga per week (157.1min; 90% CI = 120.1-194.0) which was only 4min less than the combination including all four components. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a combination of intervention components as the optimized intervention. A next step will be to test the effect of this optimized intervention on pain and substance use outcomes in a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Oliceridine used for patient-controlled analgesia on postoperative quality of recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Oliceridine, a novel biased μ-opioid receptor agonist, is widely used perioperatively, yet limited data exists regarding its impact on postoperative quality of recovery. This study investigated the effect of oliceridine-based patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) on postoperative quality of recovery among patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection. METHODS: Ninety‑four female patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection were included. Patients were randomized to two groups: oliceridine group (loading dose 1.5 mg, PCIA 0.55 mg/kg) or sufentanil group (loading dose 10 μg, PCIA 3 μg/kg). The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) score on postoperative day 1. The secondary outcomes included the QoR-40 score, the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety (HADS-A) score, the Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness and Loss of weight (FRAIL) index and adverse events within 3 postoperative days. RESULTS: Higher QoR-40 scores were found in the oliceridine group on postoperative day 1 (182.9 ± 3.1 versus 177.5 ± 3.9, p < 0.001). Compared with the sufentanil group, the oliceridine group showed better QoR-40 scores within 3 days after operation. No significant differences were observed in NRS pain scores or HADS-A scores between the two groups (all p > 0.05). However, the median FRAIL score in the oliceridine group was lower on postoperative day 2 (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Oliceridine used in PCIA improves early postoperative recovery quality of patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection. It provides analgesic effect comparable to sufentanil and lowers incidences of postoperative frailty, nausea and vomiting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2400094271.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of Ketamine and Pregabalin on Postoperative Opioid Usage and Pain Management in Spinal Fusion: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Spinal fusion is associated with substantial early postoperative pain and opioid exposure. Both ketamine and pregabalin are widely incorporated into Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols as opioid-sparing adjuncts. However, their comparative efficacy and safety in this specific setting remain uncertain. Our objective was to compare ketamine and pregabalin indirectly for early postoperative opioid consumption, pain, and adverse events in adults undergoing spinal fusion. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Trials were searched from inception through October 2025. Eligible studies were randomized trials enrolling adults undergoing instrumented spinal fusion, randomized to perioperative ketamine, pregabalin, or control, and reported extractable 24-hour opioid consumption or pain outcomes. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences in MME or VAS units, and adverse events were reported descriptively. A connected treatment network was analyzed using random-effects models. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed with the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (n=879) were included: ketamine (n=210), pregabalin (n=271), and control (n=398). Six trials contributed opioid data (3 ketamine, 3 pregabalin). Using pregabalin 150 mg as reference, ketamine was associated with lower 0-24-hour opioid use (MD -56.99 mg MME; 95% CI -99.56 to -14.43). Control (MD +21.31; 95% CI -1.05 to +43.66) and pregabalin 300 mg (MD -13.22; 95% CI -40.41 to +13.96) did not significantly differ from pregabalin 150 mg. Seven trials contributed 24-hour VAS data, with control being associated with higher pain versus pregabalin 150 mg (MD +0.84; 95% CI +0.01 to +1.66), while ketamine and pregabalin 300 mg were not k significantly different. Adverse events were generally infrequent and similar to control. CONCLUSIONS: Both ketamine and pregabalin provide early opioid sparing with comparable 24-hour analgesia. Ketamine showed a larger opioid-sparing point estimate, but indirect comparisons are imprecise. Adequately powered head-to-head trials with standardized protocols and adverse event reporting are needed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine for surgical site infiltration in lumbar fusion: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Effective postoperative pain control after lumbar spine surgery remains challenging, and excessive opioid use is associated with adverse outcomes. Evidence comparing liposomal bupivacaine (LB) with conventional long-acting local anesthetics in spine surgery is limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-center, prospective, randomized, patient- and outcome assessor-blinded trial, adult undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion were assigned (1:1) to surgical site infiltration with either LB (266 mg) plus 25 mg plain bupivacaine (LB group) or ropivacaine (R group). The primary outcome was 72 h cumulative opioid consumption (morphine milligram equivalents, MME). Secondary outcomes included time-profile opioid consumption, pain scores, rescue analgesia, safety, and functional recovery. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Cumulative MME within 72 h was significantly lower in the LB group compared with the R group [43.0 (37.0, 58.0) mg vs. 58.0 (46.0, 73.0) mg], corresponding to a 22% relative reduction (GMR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.85; p < 0.001). The reduction was most pronounced during 8-24 h and 24-48 h postoperatively. Overall pain scores at rest and with movement, as well as 72-h pain AUC, were lower in the LB group. No significant between-group differences were observed in rescue analgesia, adverse events and functional recovery. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion, surgical site infiltration with an LB-based combined regimen, compared with ropivacaine monotherapy, reduced 72-h opioid consumption and cumulative postoperative pain burden without an observed increase in adverse events or impairment of early functional recovery.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effect of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation on postoperative pain in patients undergoing thoracoscopic partial lung resection: a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain after thoracic surgery remains common and challenging. Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is a noninvasive neuromodulation technique with potential analgesic effects. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of taVNS for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing thoracoscopic partial lung resection. METHODS: Adults undergoing thoracoscopic partial lung resection were randomized to active or sham taVNS. The primary outcome was cough pain intensity at 48h post-surgery, assessed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Secondary outcomes included cough pain at 24h and 72h, resting pain, moderate-to-severe pain incidence, opioid consumption, quality of recovery, postoperative pulmonary complications , chest tube duration, hospital stay, postoperative nausea/vomiting, and adverse events. RESULTS: Among 119 analyzed patients (active n = 60, sham n = 59), active taVNS reduced cough pain scores at 24h, 48h, and 72h postoperatively, as well as resting pain (p < 0.05). It also lowered the incidence of moderate-to-severe cough pain at 24h and 48h, reduced cumulative postoperative opioid use at 24h and 72h, and decreased rescue analgesia on postoperative day 3 (p < 0.05). Active taVNS was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative pneumothorax (p < 0.05). No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Perioperative taVNS was associated with a modest analgesic benefit and reduced postoperative opioid requirements after thoracoscopic partial lung resection. The observed reduction in postoperative pneumothorax requires cautious interpretation, and further multicenter trials are needed to determine its clinical utility.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

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

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.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Impact on analgesia, diaphragmatic function, and recovery between erector spinae plane block versus superior trunk block in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective analgesia and preservation of diaphragmatic function are key considerations in analgesia for shoulder surgery. The superior trunk block provides analgesia with reduced phrenic nerve involvement, while the erector spinae plane block offers minimal impact on diaphragm motion. This randomized controlled trial compared the analgesic efficacy, impact on diaphragmatic motion, and postoperative recovery between the two blocks. METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomized to receive either erector spinae plane block or superior trunk block. Primary outcomes were postoperative VAS and changes in diaphragmatic excursion. Secondary outcomes included Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores, morphine-equivalent consumption, and the handgrip strength motor blockade. RESULTS: The superior trunk block resulted in significantly lower dynamic VAS at 1-h postoperatively (0.1 [0.0, 0.2] vs. 5.7 [4.0, 7.6]; p < 0.001) and reduced 24-h morphine consumption (7.8 [2.5, 15.0] mg vs. 12.7 [7.5, 17.3] mg; p = 0.038) compared to the erector spinae plane block. However, diaphragmatic excursion was better preserved in the erector spinae plane block group (8.37% ± 20.7% vs. -20.09% ± 22.2%; p < 0.001), with a lower incidence of partial hemidiaphragm paresis (3.3% vs. 46.7%; p < 0.001). At 24 h postoperatively, QoR-15 scores were higher in the superior trunk block group (p = 0.047), and no patient in either group developed handgrip motor blockade. CONCLUSIONS: Superior trunk block offers superior early postoperative analgesia and better overall recovery, while erector spinae plane block minimizes diaphragmatic impairment. However, the erector spinae plane block may represent an option only in carefully selected patients at high respiratory risk, acknowledging its significantly poorer early analgesic profile.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of opioid-free versus opioid-based total intravenous anaesthesia in elderly patients undergoing short-duration surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults who undergo short-duration surgery are vulnerable to opioid-related complications. It is uncertain whether an opioid-free total intravenous anaesthesia (OFA) can reduce these events. We aimed to determine whether OFA reduces the incidence of major postoperative adverse events compared with standard opioid-based total intravenous anaesthesia (OBA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-center randomized clinical trial was conducted in China. From May to August 2025, 400 patients aged ≥60 years undergoing elective, short-duration surgery (anticipated duration of less than 90 min) were randomized 1:1 to receive either OFA (n = 200) or OBA (n = 200). The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative hypoxemia, delirium, or nausea and vomiting (PONV) within 48 h. RESULTS: A total of 400 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 69.5 [7.0] years; 125 [31.3%] women). The primary composite outcome occurred in 50 patients (25.0%) in the OFA group and 87 patients (43.5%) in the OBA group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.62; p < .001). Among the OFA group had a lower incidence of hypoxemia (15.0% vs 32.0%) and PONV (8.0% vs 16.0%). Intraoperative hemodynamic stability was greater in the OFA group. However, the OFA group had a higher incidence of intraoperative bradycardia (10.0% vs 3.0%; p = .005) and longer extubation times (mean, 9.5 vs 7.2 min; p < .001). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that OFA is a viable alternative to opioid-based anesthesia for improving postoperative outcomes by reducing the incidence of hypoxemia and PONV in this population, while warranting careful management of its associated side effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2500102550.

Humans↗