SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Anesthetics, Inhalation”

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.

27 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Choice of Anesthesia in Microelectrode Recording-guided Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery for Parkinson's Disease (CHAMPION): A Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease is often performed under conscious sedation or general anesthesia. However, anesthetic agents may influence intraoperative microelectrode recording, and the optimal anesthesia method for microelectrode recording remains unclear. This study compared general anesthesia and conscious sedation in preserving microelectrode recording signal intensity during deep brain stimulation. METHODS: In this prospective, noninferiority randomized controlled trial, patients with Parkinson's disease (United Kingdom Brain Bank criteria) undergoing elective bilateral surgery were randomized 1:1 to the conscious sedation or the general anesthesia group. During surgery, a desflurane anesthetic titrated against the quality of the electrophysiologic signal was applied in the general anesthesia group, whereas patients in the conscious sedation group received dexmedetomidine anesthesia. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with high-quality microelectrode recording (normalized root mean square greater than 2.0), assessed postoperatively off-line. Secondary outcomes included operation and recording duration, 6-month clinical efficacy, and complication rates. RESULTS: Of 188 randomized patients (94 general anesthesia, 93 conscious sedation), desflurane anesthesia was noninferior for high normalized root mean square proportion (89.4% vs . 90.3%; difference, -0.96%; 95% CI, -9.62 to 7.70). The general anesthesia group had shorter operative time (difference, -9.07 min; 95% CI, -13.99 to -4.14; P < 0.001). At 6 months, changes in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale score (difference, -2.50; 95% CI, -7.20 to 2.20; P = 0.297), levodopa equivalent daily dose (difference, -58.4 mg; 95% CI, -133.56 to 16.75; P = 0.128), and complication rates (general anesthesia: 10.9% vs . conscious sedation: 8.9%; P = 0.655) were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: General anesthesia is noninferior to conscious sedation for microelectrode-guided subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation, providing equivalent signal intensity and clinical outcomes while improving procedural efficiency, supporting its use as a valid clinical option.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Developing low-carbon metered-dose inhalers: effects of propellant HFA-152a on mucociliary clearance and bronchoconstriction in two Phase 1 randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the impact of respiratory care on climate change, metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) are being reformulated with low-global warming potential (GWP) propellants. Next-generation propellant hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-152a has >90% lower GWP than HFA-134a. As part of the safety evaluation for HFA-152a, mucociliary clearance (MCC), bronchoconstriction and safety were compared with HFA-134a. METHODS: Two Phase 1, randomised, two-way crossover studies (NCT06506266/NCT06702462) were conducted. MCC study: healthy participants inhaled HFA-152a and HFA-134a in two 7-day sequences. MCC was quantified as area under radiolabelled particle retention time curve over 4 h (AUC0-4h) after nebulised 99mTc sulphur colloid, following each propellant. Bronchoconstriction study: patients with mild asthma inhaled single doses of HFA-152a and HFA-134a. Non-inferiority of HFA-152a versus HFA-134a was defined as percent change in FEV1 (litres), 15 min post dose (95% confidence intervals [CI]: lower limit >-10%, upper limit >0%). Both studies assessed safety. RESULTS: In 22 healthy participants, the impact on MCC did not differ between HFA-134a and HFA-152a (AUC0-4h geometric mean ratio [90% CI]: 1.00 [0.99, 1.01]). In 19 patients with mild asthma, neither HFA-152a nor HFA-134a induced bronchoconstriction (percent change in FEV1 at 15 min: -0.37% [HFA-152a] vs -0.60% [HFA-134a]); HFA-152a was non-inferior to HFA-134a (mean difference [95% CI]: 0.23% [-3.61, 4.07]). Adverse event (AE) rates were low and similar for both propellants in both studies; all AEs were mild, with no serious AEs or deaths. CONCLUSION: HFA-152a and HFA-134a had almost identical effects on MCC, neither induced bronchoconstriction, supporting MDI reformulation with the low-GWP propellant HFA-152a.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Randomised, Multicentre Clinical Trial Found That Hypertonic Saline Did Not Reduce the Length of Stay of Hospitalised Patients With Acute Bronchiolitis.

AIM: Bronchiolitis is a major cause of hospitalisation in young children, but the effectiveness of inhaled hypertonic saline remains unclear. We compared treating hospitalised infants with nebulised hypertonic saline or normal saline. METHOD: This multisite, double-blind RCT was conducted from 1 October 2023 to 1 April 2025 in four Polish paediatric units. Children from 5 weeks to 24 months, who had been hospitalised with mild-to-moderate bronchiolitis, were randomly assigned to receive nebulised 3% hypertonic saline or 0.9% normal saline until discharge. They were followed for 7 days. RESULTS: The study comprised 181 children (55% male) with a mean age of 8.3 ± 6.3 months: 90 were randomised to hypertonic saline and 91 to normal saline. The median hospital stay was 2.68 (1.92-4.03) days in the hypertonic saline group and 2.79 (1.8-3.96) days in the normal saline group. The mean difference was -0.11 days (95% confidence interval -0.73 to 0.12, p = 0.3). No differences were observed in clinical severity scores between the groups. Readmissions only occurred in the normal saline group (5.9%). CONCLUSION: Hypertonic saline inhalation did not reduce the length of hospital stay or improve clinical severity scores in hospitalised children with bronchiolitis, but it was associated with a lower risk of rehospitalisation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Morbidity and mortality from local anesthetics: localized and systemic toxicity.

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Local anesthetics remain vital to modern medicine, yet their narrow therapeutic window continues to result in complications. This review synthesizes recent literature to define the current landscape of local anesthetic-associated adverse events. RECENT FINDINGS: Perioperative mortality attributable to local anesthetics persists despite sustained safety initiatives and professional society recommendations. Pharmacovigilance and case data identify lidocaine (oropharyngeal, topical, and via local infiltration) as the predominant contributor to adverse outcomes, including death. Local anesthetic systemic toxicity remains an issue, with a recent shift in epidemiology: an increasing proportion of toxic events originates from surgeon- and proceduralist-administered analgesia. Anesthesiologist-controlled methods also cause toxicity via catheter-based delivery and nerve blocks in highly vascular regions. Localized toxicity in the form of high neuraxial contributes to morbidity, with recent reviews reinforcing known risk factors; whereas localized neurotoxicity appears less troublesome when managed appropriately. SUMMARY: The cumulative evidence identifies shifts in the patterns of systemic and localized toxicities. Bupivacaine-based peripheral nerve blocks no longer represent the principal cause of complications because of the advent of ultrasound guidance and lipid emulsion therapy. In contrast, high neuraxial techniques persist as a cause of morbidity, accompanied by intravenous/oropharyngeal lidocaine, proceduralist-administered local infiltration analgesia, and catheter-based delivery.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

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↗

PubMed2026

Effects of sub-anesthetic doses of esketamine on immune function and postoperative negative emotions in acoustic neuroma patients: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing acoustic neuroma (AN) surgery often experience postoperative negative emotions, including anxiety, depression, and immune function suppression. This trial evaluated whether perioperative sub-anesthetic esketamine improves early postoperative negative emotions and immune function. METHODS: In this single-center, double-blind, randomized trial, 84 patients scheduled for AN surgery were assigned to esketamine (n = 42) or placebo (n = 42). The esketamine cohort received a continuous intravenous infusion of esketamine at 0.2 mg·kg-1·h-1 during anesthesia, followed by 1 mg·kg-1 esketamine as an adjuvant in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA). The placebo group received saline. The primary outcome was the incidence of depression on postoperative day (POD1), defined as a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression subscale (HADS-D) score > 7. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients completed the study (39 in the esketamine group, 38 in the placebo group). Esketamine significantly reduced the incidence of depression at POD1 (7.7% versus 31.6%; relative risk 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.80, p = 0.008) and POD3 (0.0% versus 15.8%, relative risk 0.00, 95% CI: 0.00-0.47, p = 0.031) compared with placebo. The incidences of anxiety on POD1 and 3 and sleep disturbances on POD1 were also significantly reduced (p < 0.05). Notably, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of immune function, postoperative pain scores, or intraoperative morphine equivalent. Adverse events did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: Perioperative sub-anesthetic esketamine reduced postoperative depression and anxiety, and improve sleep quality after AN surgery, without significant effects on early immune function or acute postoperative analgesia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2400084537.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of TQC3721, an innovative, dual PDE3 and PDE4 inhibitor, in healthy subjects and patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase I and IIa clinical trials.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: TQC3721 is a novel inhaled dual phosphodiesterase (PDE3/4) inhibitor designed to provide bronchodilation and anti-inflammatory effects for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: First-in-human randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase I (SAD: 0.2 to 24 mg single dose; MAD: 12 mg once daily (QD) for 7 days in healthy subjects) and phase IIa studies (0.75 to 6 mg once or twice daily for 4 weeks in moderate-to-severe patients with COPD) were conducted. Primary outcomes included safety, pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics (PDs), change from baseline of forced expiratory volume in the first second [FEV1], and FEV1 at 12 and 24 h post-dose on days 1 and 28. KEY RESULTS: TQC3721 was rapidly absorbed (median Tmax of 0.25 to 0.5 h), mainly by pulmonary absorption rather than gastrointestinal absorption, along with low systemic exposure and lack of significant accumulation. TQC3721 demonstrated favourable safety profiles in healthy subjects and patients with COPD. In patients with COPD, TQC3721 produced rapid and outstanding bronchodilation effect sustained over 12 h post-administration, with FEV1 peaking at approximately 2 h post-dose and returning to baseline levels by 12 h, which supports a twice-daily dosing regimen for the future, and peak FEV₁ improvements ranging from 186 to 272 ml across dose groups after 4 weeks of treatment. Moreover, twice-daily 3 and 6 mg regimens were recommended for further clinical study. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Pharmacokinetic features, significant bronchodilation effects and overall favourable safety characteristics support further clinical development of TQC3721 as a potential dual-mechanism therapy for COPD.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy and Non-Invasive Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Failure in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the use of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in the management of acute respiratory failure (ARF) in the emergency department (ED). A comprehensive search of relevant sources was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing adult patients (≥ 18 years) treated in the ED for ARF and comparing HFNO to COT/NIV were included. The primary outcome was the need for endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation (IMV). Secondary outcomes included physiological and biochemical parameters, ICU admission, hospital length of stay, dyspnoea scores and mortality. A total of 17 RCTs (1955 patients) were included. There was a significant reduction in IMV favouring the HFNO group compared to COT and NIV (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.47-0.88). HFNO showed significant improvements in RR, SpO2, PaO2 and Modified Borg Dyspnoea Scale. Subgroup analysis showed reduced rates of IMV with HFNO compared to COT (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.91), but not compared to NIV (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.42-1.14). HFNO additionally showed a reduction of IMV compared to NIV and COT in undifferentiated patients (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.93), but not in exacerbations of COPD or acute heart failure. Ten of the 17 studies had at least some concern for risk of bias, with several analyses having notable heterogeneity. HFNO showed a significant reduction in rates of IMV, improvement in peripheral oxygen saturations, PaO2, respiratory rate and patient dyspnoea scores compared to COT and NIV.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation in sedated endoscopy for high-risk obstructive sleep apnea patients: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypoxemia is the most common adverse event during sedated gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients with high obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) risk (STOP-Bang ≥5) are susceptible due to sedation-induced loss of upper airway tone exacerbating airway collapsibility. Although high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) benefits general at-risk populations, its efficacy in this specific cohort remains uncertain, as its mild positive pressure falls far below therapeutic continuous positive airway pressure levels for moderate-to-severe OSA, questioning its ability to stent the collapsible airway. Our prior proof-of-concept study in this cohort observed a 5% incidence of hypoxemia with HFNC, confirming feasibility and safety and justifying this confirmatory trial. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled single-blind trial will enroll 600 adults (STOP-Bang score ≥5) undergoing elective sedated gastroenteroscopy across three centers. Participants will be 1:1 randomized (stratified by center) to HFNC (30 L/min pre-oxygenation, 60 L/min post-induction) or conventional nasal cannula (6 L/min). Both groups receive standardized propofol-alfentanil sedation. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with at least one episode of hypoxemia (SpO2 75%-90% <60 s). Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients with at least one episode of severe hypoxemia (SpO2 <75% or 75%≤SpO2<90% ≥60 s), the proportion with subclinical respiratory depression (90%≤SpO2<95%), and the frequency of other adverse events. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide definitive evidence on HFNC's efficacy in high-risk OSA patients, addressing whether it can overcome pressure limitations to prevent hypoxemia. Results are expected to inform sedation management guidelines, establish a new standard of care for this subgroup, and enhance procedural safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at the ClinicalTrials.gov on 14 December 2025 (NCT07307560).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Superficial Cervical Plexus Block and Quality of Recovery after Thyroidectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Whether adding a bilateral superficial cervical plexus block to a thyroidectomy enhanced recovery pathway improves postoperative quality of recovery remains uncertain. METHODS: In a single-center prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults undergoing thyroidectomy with general anesthesia, participants were randomized to bilateral superficial cervical plexus blocks with 0.25% bupivacaine or saline. All participants received multimodal analgesia with dexamethasone, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and incisional local anesthetic. The primary outcome was quality of recovery, measured by the QoR-40 survey, on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes included the need for rescue opioid, total opioid consumption, nausea, vomiting, antiemetic administration, length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and opioid use on postoperative day 1. RESULTS: A total of 160 participants were randomized to receive a superficial cervical plexus block with bupivacaine 0.25% (n = 78) or saline (n = 82). On postoperative day 1, mean QoR-40 scores were 174 (95% CI, 170 to 178) for bupivacaine and 173 (95% CI, 169 to 177) for saline. The adjusted mean difference between bupivacaine versus saline was 0.91 (95% CI, -3.57 to 5.40; P = 0.688). There were no significant between-group differences in the need for opioids in the PACU or on postoperative day 1, nausea, vomiting, or PACU length of stay. However, the total amount of opioid administered in the PACU was lower in the bupivacaine group (median [interquartile range], 0 [0 to 8]) compared with the saline group (2 [0 to 20]; Hodges-Lehmann location shift, 0 morphine milligram equivalents; 95% CI, -4 to 0; P = 0.017), and fewer participants in the bupivacaine group received rescue antiemetics (3 [3.8%] vs . 13 [16%]; difference, -12%; 95% CI, -22% to -1.8%; P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral superficial cervical plexus blocks did not improve quality of recovery after thyroidectomy when added to a multimodal analgesic regimen including dexamethasone, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and incisional local anesthetic but were associated with lower total PACU opioid consumption.

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

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↗

PubMed2026

Continuous Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Thoracic Paravertebral Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Thoracotomy.

OBJECTIVES: To compare postoperative analgesia using continuous ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) versus thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB), with dynamic visual analog scale (VAS) during coughing as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included static VAS (at rest), hemodynamic changes, side effects, total opioid consumption, time of first rescue analgesia, length of hospitalization, anesthesia recovery time, postanesthesia care unit stay, time to first ambulation, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: The study included 40 cases scheduled for elective thoracotomy admitted to the cardiothoracic surgery unit of Menoufia University Hospital. Patients were equally randomized into 2 groups, 20 patients each receiving either ultrasound-guided ESPB or TPVB (control group). Both groups received 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine as a loading dose followed by continuous infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine at 5 mL/h, with patient-controlled boluses of 20 mL on demand. RESULTS: Dynamic visual analogue pain scale scores were significantly lower in the ESPB group at 6, 9, 12, and 24 hours ( P =0.008, 0.035, 0.001, 0.006). Morphine consumption was significantly reduced in the ESPB group ( P < 0.001). Hypotension was more frequent in TPVB (40% vs. 10%, P =0.028). No significant differences were observed in hospital stay or patient satisfaction. DISCUSSION: The utilization of continuous ultrasound-guided ESPB demonstrated better postoperative visual analogue pain scale scores and a significant decrease in opioid consumption, with fewer side effects than TPVB.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effect of different liposomal bupivacaine concentrations in ultrasound-guided superior trunk block on postoperative analgesia and mobility: a randomized double-blind controlled trial protocol for shoulder arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder arthroscopy frequently causes severe postoperative pain that may impede recovery. Liposomal bupivacaine provides prolonged analgesia, and ultrasound-guided superior trunk block (STB) offers comparable analgesia to interscalene block with a lower risk of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. However, the optimal concentration of liposomal bupivacaine for STB remains unknown. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, controlled trial will enrol 282 adult patients scheduled for elective arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Patients will be randomly allocated (1:1:1) to receive ultrasound-guided STB with liposomal bupivacaine 66 mg (Group A), 44 mg (Group B) or 33 mg (Group C), each diluted to 10 mL. The co-primary outcomes are (1) rest pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score at 48 h post-surgery and (2) cumulative oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME) consumption within 0-48 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes include rest pain NRS scores at 6, 24 and 72 h; motor function assessed by Muscle Balance Scale, Bromage score and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score at 6, 24, 48 and 72 h; and Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score at 24 and 48 h. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence on the optimal concentration of liposomal bupivacaine for STB in arthroscopic shoulder surgery, aiming to achieve effective and prolonged analgesia without compromising shoulder mobility.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Continuous Intravenous Lidocaine for Refractory Cancer Pain in Palliative Care: A Multicenter Feasibility Study.

ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility and tolerability of continuous low-dose intravenous lidocaine infusion in patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain receiving palliative care, and to explore its potential impact on pain outcomes in real-world clinical conditions.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled feasibility study in palliative care units to evaluate continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion in patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain. Patients were randomized to receive lidocaine (5 mg/kg/day, increased to 8 mg/kg/day if pain reduction was <30% after 24 h) or placebo for 48 h. Pain intensity was assessed using the Numeric Pain Intensity Scale, with a clinically meaningful response defined as a ≥30% reduction from baseline at 40 min. Secondary outcomes included pain evolution over time, neuropathic pain, symptom burden, and tolerability.ResultsThirty-five patients were included in the final analysis (18 lidocaine, 17 placebo). No significant difference was observed between lidocaine and placebo for the primary endpoint or for secondary pain outcomes. Reductions in pain intensity were observed in both groups. In the lidocaine group, 61% of patients required dose escalation to 8 mg/kg/day. Continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion was generally well tolerated, with mostly mild adverse events and no unexpected toxicity.ConclusionIn this multicenter feasibility study, continuous low-dose intravenous lidocaine did not demonstrate a clinically meaningful analgesic benefit over placebo. As the planned sample size was not reached, the study was underpowered. These findings highlight the challenges of randomized trials in palliative care and may inform future feasibility-oriented designs.

Humans↗

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

Thoracic paravertebral block with different doses of liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia in single-port thoracoscopic lung surgery: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) with different doses of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) or ropivacaine in patients undergoing single-port thoracoscopic lung surgery. METHODS: A total of 105 patients scheduled for video-assisted single-port thoracoscopic lung surgery were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio into three groups: low-dose LB group (group LL), high-dose LB group (group HL), or ropivacaine group (group R). All received ultrasound-guided TPVB at the T5/6 level preoperatively. The primary outcome was the area under the curve (AUC) of NRS of pain at activity (AUC-aNRS) from 1 to 72 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included the AUC of NRS of pain at rest (AUC-rNRS) from 1 to 72 h postoperatively, NRS of pain at rest and at activity at 1, 6, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively, and the cumulative opioid consumption at 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively. Additionally, postoperative recovery and adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: AUC-aNRS differed significantly among groups (p = 0.0092), with high-dose LB lower than low-dose LB (p = 0.0071), but not versus ropivacaine. No significant difference was found in AUC-rNRS (p > 0.05). The group-by-time interactions for NRS of pain at rest and at activity were not significant (p > 0.05). Cumulative opioid consumption at 24, 48, and 72 h was lower in group HL versus group LL (all p < 0.017), but not versus ropivacaine. Postoperative recovery and adverse events showed no differences (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: LB combined with TPVB is not superior to ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia in single-port thoracoscopic lung resection.

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↗