Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Analgesics, Opioid”

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.

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

23 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Efficacy of esketamine in reducing nausea and vomiting after anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are significant perioperative challenges. This study evaluated the efficacy of perioperative esketamine in preventing PONV. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to August 2025 for randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of perioperative esketamine on PONV. The primary outcome was PONV incidence. Secondary outcomes included time to first flatus, postoperative pain degree, anxiety scores, agitation, anesthesia recovery time, and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay duration. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 and STATA 15.0 software. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to assess result stability and explore potential sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Thirty-eight randomized trials (3,425 patients) were included. Esketamine reduced the risk of nausea (RR=0.69, 95% CI: 0.53-0.90) and vomiting (RR=0.75, 95% CI: 0.57-0.98), shortened time to first flatus (SMD=-0.81, 95% CI: -1.48 to -0.15), and decreased rescue analgesic needs within 2 days (SMD=0.32, 95% CI: 0.2-0.5). However, it prolonged anesthesia recovery time (SMD=0.97, 95% CI: 0.28-1.67) and PACU stay (SMD=0.76, 95% CI: 0.27-1.26). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative esketamine may reduce PONV and aid gastrointestinal recovery, but its potential to delay anesthesia recovery and PACU discharge requires consideration. Further studies are needed to clarify its risk-benefit profile. DATE OF FIRST SUBMISSION TO PROSPERO: 10 March 2024. DATE OF THE START OF STUDY SCREENING AGAINST ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: 21 March 2024.

Humans

Effect of intraoperative 40-hz gamma-frequency auditory stimulation on postoperative delirium in older adults undergoing major surgery: a randomized clinical trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common and clinically significant complication among older adults undergoing major surgery under general anesthesia. Gamma-frequency (40-Hz) auditory stimulation has demonstrated potential neuroprotective and cognition-enhancing effects, suggesting a plausible role in perioperative delirium prevention. However, direct clinical evidence supporting intraoperative 40-Hz auditory stimulation in reducing POD remains limited, warranting rigorous evaluation in a randomized trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial will enroll 550 older adults scheduled for major noncardiac, nonneurosurgical surgery under general anesthesia. Participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the active stimulation group, receiving intraoperative 40-Hz gamma-frequency auditory stimulation delivered via headphones for 2 h following successful anesthesia induction, or the sham stimulation group, wearing headphones without active auditory output. The primary outcome is the incidence of POD on postoperative day 1 though 3, assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) or the CAM for the ICU (CAM-ICU). Secondary outcomes include POD severity, sleep quality, pain scores, analgesic consumption, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), rescue antiemetic use, duration of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, length of hospital stay, quality of postoperative recovery, incidence of perioperative adverse events; postoperative morbidity, health-related quality of life, and all-cause 30-day mortality. DISCUSSION: This trial will determine whether intraoperative 40-Hz gamma-frequency auditory stimulation reduces the incidence of POD among older adults undergoing major surgery under general anesthesia. If efficacious, this noninvasive intervention could constitute a feasible perioperative strategy to mitigate delirium risk and enhance postoperative recovery. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2500115156).

Humans

Comparison of ultrasound-guided two-point block of the rhomboid intercostal vs. thoracic paravertebral for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing three-port thoracoscopic surgery: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: The anesthetic characteristics of ultrasound-guided two-point rhomboid intercostal block (RIB) have not been fully established. This study compared the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided two-point RIB with that of two-point thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) for postoperative pain control and recovery in patients undergoing three-port thoracoscopic surgery. METHODS: Seventy patients aged 18-80 years scheduled for three-port thoracoscopic pulmonary resection were block-randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either TPVB or RIB. Both techniques were performed using 10 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at each injection site. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) pain score at rest 24 h after surgery, with a predefined non-inferiority margin of Δ = 1. Secondary outcomes included NRS at rest and during coughing at 0.5, 2, 4, 12, 18, 24, and 48 h postoperatively, as well as the 24h postoperative Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) score. RESULTS: The final analysis included 34 patients in the TPVB group and 34 in the RIB group. The mean difference in resting NRS scores at 24 h between the two groups was 0.088 (95% CI, -0.377 to 0.553), confirming the non-inferiority of RIB. However, the need for rescue analgesia was numerically greater in the RIB group than in the TPVB group (p = 0.045). The 24-h postoperative QoR-40 scores and cumulative sufentanil consumption within 48 h after surgery were comparable between the groups (both p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided two-point RIB provided postoperative analgesia that was non-inferior to TPVB in patients undergoing three-port thoracoscopic surgery.

Adolescent

Intravenous lidocaine reduces the propofol EC50 for loss of consciousness and intraoperative anesthetic consumption in gynecological laparoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous lidocaine reduces propofol requirements and procedure-related adverse events. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to test whether intravenous lidocaine would reduce the effect-site concentration of propofol required to achieve loss of consciousness and decrease propofol consumption during total intravenous anesthesia in gynecological laparoscopy. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Sixty patients were randomly allocated to receive either intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg·kg-¹ bolus) followed by continuous infusion or an equal volume of saline. Propofol was administered via target-controlled infusion starting at an effect-site concentration of 3.5 μg/mL. The concentration was then adjusted in steps of 0.5 μg/mLaccording to Dixon's up-and-down sequential method: decreased if loss of consciousness was achieved, or increased if not. Loss of consciousness was defined as loss of response to verbal commands. The median effective concentration (EC50) of propofol for inducing loss of consciousness was calculated using the Dixon's up-and-down method. General anesthesia was maintained with propofol and remifentanil, guided by state entropy (target 40-60) and surgical pleth index (target 20-50). Drug consumption was normalized to anesthesia duration and body weight. RESULTS: The estimated EC50 of propofol for inducing loss of consciousness was significantly lower in the lidocaine group than in the saline group (3.32 μg/mL, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 3.04-3.59 vs. 3.89 μg/mL, 95% CI: 3.50-4.28). Under the study protocol, the lidocaine group also required less propofol (8.62 mg·kg-1·h-1, 95% CI: 8.10-9.15 vs. 9.89 mg·kg-1·h-1, 95% CI: 9.05-10.73) and less remifentanil (0.23 μg·kg-1·min-1, 95% CI: 0.21-0.24 vs. 0.27 μg·kg-1·min-1, 95% CI: 0.24-0.30) compared with the saline group. CONCLUSION: Intravenous lidocaine reduced the propofol EC50 for Loss of Consciousness (LOC) and decreased intraoperative propofol and remifentanil consumptions in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopy. These findings suggest a propofol- and opioid-sparing effect of intravenous lidocaine in this setting, although confirmation in larger multicenter trials is needed.

Humans

Ultrasound-guided high-voltage vs conventional pulsed radiofrequency in elderly cervical radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy present therapeutic challenges owing to comorbidities and medication-related risks. Long-term pharmacotherapy and surgical interventions are often suboptimal, necessitating evaluation of optimized pulsed radiofrequency strategies under image guidance. OBJECTIVES: This superiority trial compared the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided cervical nerve root high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency (HVP-PRF) versus conventional pulsed radiofrequency (C-PRF) for pain management in elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy. METHODS: This single-center, parallel-group, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial enrolled patients aged 60-85 years with cervical radiculopathy, randomly assigned (1:1) to HVP-PRF (70 V) or C-PRF (45 V). Procedures were performed under ultrasound guidance with sensory/motor stimulation confirmation and temperature &#x2264;42&#xb0;C. The primary outcome was change in upper-limb radiating pain on the Numeric Rating Scale (&#x394;NRS) from baseline to 3 months. Secondary outcomes included Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck pain NRS, Patient Global Impression of Change, responder rates, rescue analgesia use, and adverse events. Follow-up occurred at 1 week, 1, and 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were randomized and 101 received treatment. At 3 months, HVP-PRF demonstrated significantly greater radiating pain improvement versus C-PRF (adjusted mean difference 1.24, 95% CI 0.46-2.02, P=0.002). Functional improvement (NDI) was superior in the HVP-PRF group at 3 months (AMD 6.47, 95% CI 2.11-10.83, P=0.004). Responder rates (&#x2265;50% pain reduction) were higher with HVP-PRF at 3 months (68.75% vs. 42.22%, OR 3.01, P=0.011) and 6 months (65.22% vs. 43.18%, OR 2.52, P=0.035). Rescue analgesic use was lower in the HVP-PRF group during 1-3 months intervals (both P<0.05). Adverse event rates were comparable (27.45% vs. 32.00%). CONCLUSION: Under ultrasound visualization and electrical stimulation-based target confirmation with temperature control &#x2264;42&#xb0;C, HVP-PRF provided greater and more durable relief of upper limb radiating pain compared with C-PRF in elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy, with a comparable safety profile.

Humans