SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “intravenous anaesthesia”

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.

41 recordsLinked to original sources

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↗

PubMed2026

Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring Using Propofol-Fentanyl Versus Desflurane-Dexmedetomidine Anesthesia During Spinal Cord Tumor Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing resection of spinal cord tumours require intraoperative neuromonitoring. Transcranial electrical stimulation is used to record myogenic responses during surgery. This study aimed to compare the effect of 2 anaesthetic regimens, propofol/fentanyl versus desflurane/dexmedetomidine, on the ability to record MEPs with an amplitude of 50 µV or greater. Our secondary outcome compared intraoperative haemodynamics, recovery profile, and postoperative analgesia between the groups. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blinded, open-label, single-centre, randomized controlled trial of 50 adult patients undergoing spinal cord tumour resection with TcmMEP monitoring. Patients were randomized to 2 groups: Group P (n=25) received intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and fentanyl; group D (n=25) received desflurane and dexmedetomidine. RESULTS: We recorded TcmMEP's in 80% of group P and 76% group D (95% CI: -23% to 31%, P =1.00). The time in minutes for spontaneous breathing (21.04±11.31 vs. 8.00±3.42 [8.29-,17.79, P =0.01]), extubation (31.56±17.56 vs. 10.84±3.99 [13.48-27.96; P =0.01]), emergence (33.68±18.11 vs. 10.92±4.01 [15.30-30.22, P =0.001]), discharge readiness (45.00±25.24 vs. 15.56±6.08 [19.00-39.88; P =0.001]) and requirement of first analgesia (136.6±108.04 vs. 230.8±81.33) (-148.58 to -39.82; P =0.01) was lower in group D compared with group P. Postoperative analgesia assessed using the Visual Analogue Score was lower in group D compared with group P at 12 and 24 hours. (1.68±1.18 vs. 0.64±1.31 [0.33-1.74 P =0.001]) :1.4±0.95 vs. 0.36± 0.70 (0.56-1.51; P =0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found similar rates of successful TcMEP monitoring using desflurane-dexmedetomidine and propofol-fentanyl. Patients who received desflurane-dexmedetomidine had reduced emergence time, discharge readiness, and lower pain scores in the postoperative period.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A Triple-Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Hydromorphone vs. Fentanyl for Children Undergoing Tonsillectomy.

BACKGROUND: Tonsillectomy is one of the most frequently performed pediatric surgeries; however, little evidence guides the choice of intraoperative opioids in a population at an elevated risk for perioperative respiratory complications. This study tested the hypothesis that fewer children who received hydromorphone during tonsillectomy would require postoperative "rescue" opioids compared to children who received fentanyl. METHODS: We conducted a triple-blind, randomized, controlled trial to compare intravenous hydromorphone versus fentanyl in pediatric patients undergoing tonsillectomy. Children aged 2-15 years undergoing bilateral tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy were assigned (1:1) to receive hydromorphone (10 mcg/kg) or fentanyl (1 mcg/kg) intraoperatively. The primary endpoint was the number of patients who required rescue intravenous opioid analgesia following endotracheal extubation. Secondary endpoints included pain scores, pulse oximetry saturations, postoperative nausea, time in the recovery room, morphine milligram equivalents in the post-anesthesia care unit, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 188 children underwent randomization, and 180 were analyzed (90 in each group). The median age was 5 years (interquartile range: 3-7 years). Rescue intravenous opioid was administered to 48 (53%) children who received intraoperative hydromorphone and 66 (73%) children who received intraoperative fentanyl (difference, 20.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 6.2-33.8) (p = 0.005). Children who received hydromorphone also had lower mean pain scores for the first 15 min postoperatively and lower median morphine milligram equivalents. The incidence of adverse events was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study in children undergoing tonsillectomy found that intraoperative hydromorphone resulted in improved analgesia in the recovery room compared to fentanyl. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04230681.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2026

Clinical effectiveness of transversus abdominis plane block versus local anaesthesia wound infiltration for postoperative pain relief after laparoscopic appendicectomy in children: A multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain relief after laparoscopic appendicectomy in children provided by transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and local anaesthesia wound infiltration (LAWI) of trocar insertion sites has never been compared. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether TAP block could decrease postoperative opioid requirements after laparoscopic appendicectomy in children compared with LAWI. DESIGN: Multicentre, double-blind, phase III randomised trial. SETTING: Two tertiary paediatric surgery centres. PATIENTS: Children aged 3 to 15 years admitted for laparoscopic appendicectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the total dose of nalbuphine delivered within 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the Face Legs Activity Cry Consolability (FLACC) scale values at 1, 2, 6, 12 and 24 h, the time from levobupivacaine injection to the first dose of nalbuphine, and the time from the end of surgery to the first mobilisation. Patients received either ultrasound-guided TAP block (TAP group) or LAWI of trocar insertion sites (infiltration group) with 0.6 ml kg -1 of levobupivacaine 2.5 mg ml -1 , combined with standardised systemic multimodal analgesia including paracetamol, ketoprofen, phloroglucinol and nalbuphine. RESULTS: Forty-six and 50 patients were analysed in the TAP and infiltration groups, respectively [age: 10 [7 to 12] versus 10 [8 to 12] years; females: 16 (35%) versus 25 (50%); duration of surgery: 71 [64 to 90] versus 69 [56 to 89] min]. The primary outcome (total nalbuphine dose) was 0.2 [0.0 to 0.2] and 0.2 [0.0 to 0.2] mg kg -1 in the TAP and infiltration groups, respectively ( P  = 0.95). FLACC scale values did not significantly differ between the two groups ( P  = 0.78). Time to the first dose of nalbuphine or to first mobilisation was not significantly different between groups ( P value for log-rank test = 0.095 and 0.18, respectively). CONCLUSION: TAP block does not appear to provide a greater opioid-sparing effect than LAWI of trocar insertion sites after laparoscopic appendicectomy in children, when combined with systemic multimodal analgesia including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04969133.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of single-injection vs. continuous brachial plexus blocks for shoulder surgeries on patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Single-injection and continuous brachial plexus block techniques are used widely for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing shoulder surgery. Although patient-reported outcomes are described in individual studies, their effects have not been synthesised comprehensively using a patient-centred framework. We sought to compare the effects of single-injection vs. continuous brachial plexus block techniques on patient-reported outcomes in adult patients following elective shoulder surgery. METHODS: Databases were searched from inception to October 2025 and randomised controlled trials reporting patient-reported outcomes were included. Co-primary outcomes were postoperative patient-reported pain intensity at rest and during movement at 12 h, 24 h and 48 h post-surgery. Secondary outcomes included nausea and vomiting; sleep quality; patient satisfaction; opioid requests; and functional scores. Random-effects meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis were performed, with risk of bias and quality of patient-reported outcome reporting assessed. RESULTS: Twenty randomised controlled trials that included 1198 patients were analysed. Continuous brachial plexus blocks were associated with lower pain at rest at 12 h, 24 h and 48 h, with mean differences (MD) of -1.96 (95%CI -2.81 to -1.11, p < 0.001), -1.66 (95%CI -2.27 to -1.05, p < 0.001) and - 1.18 (95%CI -1.84 to -0.53, p < 0.001), respectively. Pain on movement could only be pooled at 24 h and 48 h and showed MD -2.04 (95%CI -4.26-0.19, p = 0.07) and - 1.30 (95%CI -3.67-1.07, p = 0.28) respectively. The co-primary outcomes approached or exceeded the predefined minimal clinically important difference for pain scores after shoulder surgery, in favour of continuous techniques. DISCUSSION: Continuous brachial plexus blocks are associated with better pain at rest and other patient-centred outcomes following shoulder surgery, while effects on dynamic pain and long-term functional recovery remain uncertain.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Pulmonary artery catheters or central venous catheters for cardiac surgery: the PUMA Pilot randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary artery catheters are used widely in cardiac surgery despite observed associations with worse outcomes and guidelines that recommend against their routine use. No adequately powered randomised trials are available. METHODS: The PUMA Pilot was a multicentre, randomised, parallel assignment, open-label, pilot and feasibility trial conducted at three tertiary cardiac surgery centres. Eligible patients were adults undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, aortic valve replacement or surgery on the aortic root or ascending aorta with or without aortic valve replacement, with a predicted surgical mortality of < 2%. Patients were allocated randomly to receive a pulmonary artery catheter or a central venous catheter inserted immediately before surgery. The primary feasibility outcome was protocol compliance, defined as receiving the assigned intervention without crossover. Secondary feasibility outcomes were eligibility rate; recruitment proportion and rate; data completeness; and rate of clinician refusal. RESULTS: We screened 480 patients and 206 (43%) were eligible; 150/203 (74%) approached provided informed consent. Three of 206 (1%) eligible patients were not included due to clinician refusal. Of 149 patients who were randomised, 76 were assigned to the pulmonary artery catheter group and 73 to the central venous catheter group. For the primary feasibility outcome, 147 patients (99%) received the allocated intervention. Data were complete for 144 (97%) patients. Median (IQR [range]) days alive and at home at 30 days was 23.7 (21.9-24.7 [7.0-26.0]) in the pulmonary artery catheter group and 22.9 (20.8-23.9 [8.6-25.8]) in the central venous catheter group. Acute kidney injury occurred in 26/76 (34%) patients in the pulmonary artery catheter group and 14/73 (19%) in the central venous catheter group. DISCUSSION: A randomised trial of pulmonary artery catheters compared with central venous catheters in low-risk cardiac surgery is feasible. Such a trial would address significant practice variability and inform international guidelines.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of detomidine alone or combined with butorphanol on oxygenation status, F-shunt and sedation level in healthy sheep.

This study evaluated the effects of detomidine alone or combined with butorphanol on arterial oxygenation, gas exchange indices, estimated shunt fraction (F-shunt) and sedation level in healthy sheep. A prospective, randomized, blinded, experimental study was conducted on twenty-seven Merino sheep allocated to three groups (9 sheep/group): 5 μg/kg detomidine +200 μg/kg butorphanol (Deto5But), 10 μg/kg detomidine + 200 μg/kg butorphanol (Deto10But), or 10 μg/kg detomidine (Deto10) administered intravenously. Following arterial and venous catheter placement, arterial blood samples were collected to determine oxygenation status and F-shunt at baseline (fraction of inspired oxygen, FiO₂: 21%), 5 min after sedation (FiO₂: 21%), and at 5 and 30 min after propofol induction (FiO₂: 100%). Sedation was evaluated by a blinded observer at 5, 10, and 15 min after drug administration using two numerical scales. Sedation produced a significant deterioration in oxygenation parameters, gas exchange indices, and F-shunt (15.36%: 95% CI 10.07-20.65; p = 0.001) compared with baseline, without significant differences between treatment groups. However, five minutes after induction of anaesthesia, the Deto5But group presented better oxygenation, gas exchange efficency, and F-shunt values compared with Deto10But (10.30%: 95% CI 0.86-19.76; p = 0.029) and Deto10 (13.93%: 95% CI 2.94-24.92%; p = 0.008). Sedation scores did not differ significantly between treatment groups or across time points. Combination of detomidine at 5 μg/kg with 200 μg/kg of butorphanol provided adequate sedation and was associated with a milder impact on oxygenation and F-shunt at 5 min post-induction.

Animals↗

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

Machine learning vs. traditional methods for predicting postoperative cardiac complications after non-cardiac surgery: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Accurate prediction of peri-operative cardiac complications is critical to optimise pre-operative decision-making. Traditional risk prediction scores, such as the Revised Cardiac Risk Index, show only modest discrimination. Machine learning can model complex, non-linear relationships but their predictive performance compared with traditional scores remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary outcome was postoperative adverse cardiac events following non-cardiac surgery. Prediction models were assessed relative to the Revised Cardiac Risk Index. As many studies evaluated multiple versions of each model type, the highest performing ('best version') and lowest performing ('worst version') results were analysed. Models were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: Thirteen studies evaluating 54 models and 927,113 patients were included. Machine learning approaches generally outperformed traditional risk scores. Automated machine learning ranked highest (SUCRA 96.6) showed the greatest improvement in the best version analysis (mean difference (MD) 0.28 (95%CrI 0.16-0.40)) and remained superior in the sensitivity analysis (MD 0.30 (95%CrI 0.14-0.45)). Gradient boosting models showed superior performance over the Revised Cardiac Risk Index across analysis (best version: MD 0.20 (95%CrI 0.14-0.26), worst version: MD 0.18 (95%CrI 0.12-0.25), SUCRA 82.4). The Gupta Perioperative Risk for Myocardial Infarction or Cardiac Arrest score outperformed the Revised Cardiac Risk Index in the best version analysis (MD 0.16 (95%CrI 0.01-0.32)). Between-study heterogeneity was low. None of the included studies externally validated their machine learning models and only six were judged to be at low risk of bias. DISCUSSION: Most machine learning models showed better discrimination than traditional risk scores, with automated machine learning and gradient boosting models ranking highest. However, study quality, calibration reporting and absence of external validation limit immediate clinical adoption. Prospective, multicentre evaluation is required before integration of these models into peri-operative practice.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

King's Mill anterior-posterior and transverse versus paracervical block in operative outpatient hysteroscopy: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain control during operative outpatient hysteroscopy remains a clinical challenge, with the paracervical block (PCB) showing inconsistent efficacy. The King's Mill Anterior-Posterior and Transverse (KAPT) block targets the Lee-Frankenhauser plexus within the uterosacral ligament complex, where the highest density of uterine and cervical sensory fibres lies. We compared the KAPT block with the PCB in operative outpatient hysteroscopy. METHODS: Single-centre, participant- and outcome assessor-blinded randomised controlled trial in a UK district general hospital. Forty-eight women undergoing operative outpatient hysteroscopy were randomised 1:1 to the KAPT block or the PCB, each delivered with 10 ml of prilocaine. Pain was measured on a 10-point Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) during the procedure and 10 minutes post-procedure (co-primary endpoints), and during cervical dilatation (exploratory). Analyses used the Mann-Whitney U test on an intention-to-treat basis, with Hodges-Lehmann median differences, percentile bootstrap 95% confidence intervals, and a hierarchical fixed-sequence testing strategy. RESULTS: Median intra-procedural VAS was 1 (IQR 0 to 3) with the KAPT block versus 2 (IQR 1 to 6) with the PCB (Hodges-Lehmann median difference -1.00, 95% CI -3.00 to 0.00; p = 0.040). At 10 minutes post-procedure, median VAS was 0 (IQR 0 to 1.25) versus 2 (IQR 0 to 3.25) (median difference -1.00, 95% CI -2.00 to 0.00; p = 0.011). Both co-primary endpoints reached significance under hierarchical testing. Cervical dilatation pain did not differ significantly (p = 0.146). Satisfaction was 100% in both arms; willingness to recommend was 100% (KAPT) versus 95.8% (PCB). No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The KAPT block was associated with lower intra-procedural and post-procedural pain than the PCB, with effect sizes consistent with a clinically meaningful difference. These findings support the KAPT block as a superior, anatomically targeted alternative to the PCB and justify evaluation in a larger multicentre trial.Trial registration: ISRCTN15619382.

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

A phase I clinical study of the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of SHR-2106, an anti-CD40 antibody, following single intravenous or subcutaneous administration in healthy participants.

BACKGROUND: SHR-2106 is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that blocks CD40-CD40L interactions and has demonstrated immunosuppressive activity and graft-prolonging effects in preclinical studies. This first-in-human Phase I study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity of single intravenous or subcutaneous doses of SHR-2106 in healthy adults. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase I study enrolled healthy participants. Fifty-one participants were enrolled in seven cohorts and received five intravenous doses (50-1200 mg) or two subcutaneous doses (300 and 600 mg). Safety, serum pharmacokinetics, CD40 occupancy on B cells, and anti-drug antibodies were assessed using standard clinical and bioanalytical methods. RESULTS: SHR-2106 demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile, and most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild to moderate laboratory abnormalities with incidence rates comparable to placebo. SHR-2106 exhibited nonlinear pharmacokinetics consistent with target-mediated drug disposition, with a dose-dependent increase in geometric mean terminal half-life following intravenous administration (1.83-10.7 days). Absolute bioavailability after subcutaneous administration was approximately 60%. CD40 occupancy exceeded 80% within 24 h at all doses, with saturation duration increasing from 7 to 70 days across the intravenous dose range and remaining comparable between routes at matched doses. Anti-drug antibody incidence decreased with increasing intravenous dose and did not significantly affect pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics. CONCLUSION: SHR-2106 was well tolerated and achieved rapid and sustained CD40 engagement, supporting dose and route selection for Phase II studies.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Evaluation of intravenous sedation in dental implant surgeries: A prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of intravenous sedation on patient-centered outcomes during implant and bone augmentation surgeries. METHOD: A prospective observational cohort study included 40 patients undergoing placement of ≥3 implants, with or without bone augmentation. Patients underwent surgery under either intravenous sedation (n = 20) or local anesthesia alone (n = 20), according to routine clinical decision-making and patient preference. The sedation group received intravenous sedation with a multimodal regimen comprising remimazolam, dexmedetomidine, alfentanil, and low-dose esketamine, whereas the control group received local anesthesia only. Patient-reported outcome measures, hemodynamic parameters (SBP, DBP, HR, SpO2), postoperative pain (0-10 scale), and OHRQoL (OHIP-14) were recorded from baseline through 7 days post-surgery. RESULTS: Intravenous sedation was associated with significantly lower intraoperative pain (0.5 [IQR: 0∼2.75] vs. 3.25 ± 2.40, p = 0.003), anxiety (1 [IQR: 0∼2.75] vs. 4 [IQR: 3∼6], p = 0.001), and experienced discomfort (2 [IQR: 1∼3.75] vs. 4.15 ± 2.16, p = 0.016), and shortened perceived treatment duration (2.90 ± 2.34 vs. 5 [IQR: 4∼5], p = 0.020). Early postoperative pain was lower in the sedation group from Days 1-4 (p = 0.003-0.010). Hemodynamic parameters were more stable under sedation, with lower SBP (116.42 ± 13.32 vs. 144.11 ± 17.42 mmHg, p < 0.001), DBP (73.21 ± 10.28 vs. 82.37 ± 11.03 mmHg, p = 0.012), and HR (71.00 [IQR: 62.50∼79.25] vs. 85.00 ± 10.72 bpm, p = 0.021). OHRQoL scores favored the sedation group in swallowing, diet, malaise, and daily activities, particularly during the first three postoperative days (p=0.006-0.040). CONCLUSION: Intravenous sedation may enhance the patient experience during implant and/or bone augmentation procedures by reducing intraoperative pain and anxiety, improving hemodynamic stability, and promoting better early-postoperative recovery and OHRQoL. These findings suggest that intravenous sedation provides a safe and effective alternative for implant dentistry surgery, particularly for anxious or pain-sensitive individuals.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Intravenous Ketamine reduces psychological pain in suicidal inpatients: A secondary analysis of a six-week randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychological pain has been conceptualized as an unbearable inner experience and a possible precondition for suicidal ideation. No randomized placebo-controlled study has specifically investigated psychological pain as a treatment target in psychiatric populations. We examined ketamine's effect on psychological pain in suicidal psychiatric inpatients. METHODS: This secondary analysis used KETIS, a 6-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Participants received two 40-minute intravenous infusions of ketamine (0.5 mg/kg) or placebo (0.9% saline) 24 h apart, alongside usual care and medication. Psychological and physical pain were assessed at baseline, repeatedly during 96 h, and at weeks 2, 4, and 6 using the self-rated PPP-VAS. Longitudinal mixed models compared pain trajectories. RESULTS: The trial randomized suicidal inpatients to ketamine (n = 73) or placebo (n = 83). Psychological pain decreased in both groups but was lower with ketamine during the first 96 h. Pointwise scores were lower with ketamine from 40 min to 96 h, largest at 40 min, 2 h, 4 h, and 24 h (all p < 0.001), but not at weeks 2, 4, or 6. This early difference remained significant after adjustment for depressive symptoms and hopelessness. The early reduction appeared more pronounced in the bipolar subgroup. No robust baseline predictors of outcome were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous ketamine was associated with a greater reduction in psychological pain than placebo in suicidal inpatients, with the clearest effects emerging within the first hours after treatment and remaining evident through the first 96 h. Ketamine may represent a clinically relevant option as a psychological pain reliever in psychiatric patients.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Intravenous Tranexamic Acid Reduces Perioperative Blood Loss in Reduction Mammoplasty With Immediate Implant-Based Reconstruction: A Randomized, Triple-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative hematoma and oozing can compromise outcomes after reduction mammoplasty with immediate reconstruction. Intravenous (IV) tranexamic acid (TXA) is antifibrinolytic, but prospective evidence in this setting is limited. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether a single pre-incision dose of IV TXA reduces perioperative blood loss and fibrinolytic activation vs placebo. METHODS: In this randomized, triple-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, 60 women (American Society of Anesthesiologists I/II, 18-75 years) undergoing bilateral reduction mammoplasty with immediate implant-based reconstruction received TXA 10 mg/kg in 100 mL saline or placebo 10 min before incision. The primary outcome was total blood loss within 24 h (intraoperative suction + swab plus drain output). Secondary outcomes were perioperative changes in hemoglobin, D-dimer and fibrinogen, and complications within 30 days. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed. RESULTS: All patients completed follow-up. Total blood loss was lower with TXA than with placebo (mean ± standard deviation: 221.1 ± 72.4 vs 298.1 ± 90.6 mL; mean difference -77.0 mL; 95% CI, -122.4 to -31.6; P = .001). Intraoperative loss and 24 h drain output were also reduced. Postoperative D-dimer rise was attenuated with TXA (0.31 ± 0.15 vs 0.49 ± 0.22 µg/mL; P = .002); hemoglobin decline was smaller. No thromboembolic, neurologic, or allergic events occurred; no skin-flap necrosis was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-incisional IV TXA safely reduces perioperative bleeding and fibrinolytic activity after reduction mammoplasty. These findings support incorporation of IV TXA into perioperative protocols. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 (THERAPEUTIC): For image description, please refer to the figure legend and surrounding text.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Phase IIB, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Intravenous Defibrotide for the Prevention and Treatment of Respiratory Distress and Cytokine Release Syndrome in COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Endothelial dysfunction is key in COVID-19 pathogenesis. This randomized, double-blind phase IIb trial investigated continuous intravenous infusion of defibrotide in patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection and respiratory failure. METHODS: One-hundred and fifty patients were randomized (2:1) to defibrotide or placebo, stratified by disease severity (WHO COVID-19 severity scale 4/5 vs. 6). The primary endpoint was clinical improvement time (days from first improvement through Day 30). RESULTS: Median clinical improvement time was not significantly different with defibrotide versus placebo (15.0 [IQR: 0-24] vs. 20.0 [IQR: 9-25] days; p = 0.10). Day-30 (23.0% vs. 22.0%) and Day-60 (26.0% vs. 22.0%) mortality, reduction in mean fraction of inspired oxygen during treatment, and median duration of hospitalization did not differ with defibrotide versus placebo. Defibrotide demonstrated favorable safety, with no differences versus placebo in serious adverse events (34.0% vs. 36.0%), hypotension (16.0% vs. 12.0%), or hemorrhage (13.0% vs. 8.0%). Exploratory pre-specified biomarker analyses showed greater early d-dimer reduction and lymphocyte recovery with defibrotide, although these results require validation. CONCLUSION: Continuous intravenous infusion of defibrotide was safe but did not improve clinical outcomes in severe COVID-19. Further analyses will explore mechanistic actions and pharmacokinetics of defibrotide and the pathophysiology of endothelial dysfunction in COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT identifier: 2020-001409-21. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04348383.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Intravenous Nicorandil in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary PCI: The CLEAN Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Nicorandil, an adenosine triphosphate-sensitive potassium-channel opener with nitrate-like properties, may reduce reperfusion injury and microvascular obstruction in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), but large-scale randomized evidence on long-term clinical outcomes is inconclusive. OBJECTIVES: The CLEAN trial aimed to assess whether adjunctive intravenous nicorandil improves 12-month clinical outcomes in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 49 hospitals in China, patients aged 18 to 80 years with STEMI within 12 hours of symptom onset were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous nicorandil (6 mg bolus before reperfusion followed by 6 mg/h infusion for 48 h) or matching placebo. Oral nicorandil was prohibited during follow-up. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure within 12 months. RESULTS: Between January 2021 and December 2023, 1,503 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to nicorandil (n = 748) or placebo (n = 755). The primary composite outcome occurred in 98 patients (13.1%) in the nicorandil group (113 events over 717.2 person-years) and 99 (13.1%) in the placebo group (136 events over 710.3 person-years), with no significant difference between groups (rate ratio: 0.869; 95% CI: 0.650-1.162; P = 0.3429). Among secondary outcomes, nominal reductions were observed in cardiovascular death (1.9% vs 3.6%; HR: 0.515; 95% CI: 0.269-0.983) and target-vessel revascularization (1.1% vs 3.0%; HR: 0.322; 95% CI: 0.143-0.727), whereas rates of nonfatal myocardial infarction and unplanned hospitalization for heart failure were similar between groups. Adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, adjunctive intravenous nicorandil did not significantly reduce the 12-month primary composite outcome. These findings do not support routine use of intravenous nicorandil in unselected patients with STEMI. (Clinical Efficacy and sAfety of Intravenous Nicorandil; NCT04665648).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The analgesic efficacy of intrathecal morphine compared to peripheral regional analgesia in total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following elective total hip arthroplasty, pain continues to be a significant problem. Intrathecal morphine or peripheral regional analgesia, that is local infiltration analgesia or peripheral nerve block, are common analgesic modalities, but it is still not known which is superior. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: The following electronic databases were searched from inception to 24 March 2026: CENTRAL; Ovid Embase; Ovid MEDLINE; Scopus; and Web of Science. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared intrathecal morphine to peripheral regional analgesia in patients scheduled for elective total hip arthroplasty under general or spinal anaesthesia. RESULTS: Eight trials and 471 patients were included. The peripheral regional analgesia was peripheral nerve block in six trials and local infiltration analgesia in two trials. No difference was demonstrated between intrathecal morphine and peripheral regional analgesia in regard to the first coprimary outcome, the pain score at rest at 24 h. The quality of evidence was moderate. Intrathecal morphine was found to be superior to peripheral regional analgesia with respect to the second coprimary outcome, the cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption at 24 h. Mean difference (95% CI) was 11.38 mg (4.31-18.45; P  = 0.002, I2  = 81%). The quality of evidence was low. Intrathecal morphine was revealed to be superior to peripheral regional analgesia at 8-12 h for the pain score at rest, 1.24 (0.60-1.88); P  = 0.0001, I2  = 68%; pain score on movement, 1.15 (0.12-2.17), P  = 0.03, I2  = 65%; but the rate of in hospital pruritus was reduced with peripheral regional analgesia, 0.31 (0.17-0.58), P  = 0.0002, I2  = 0%. No differences in functional status were shown. CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference between intrathecal morphine and peripheral regional analgesia in regard to pain score at rest at 24 h. Intrathecal morphine may lead to a favourable effect on some but not all analgesic indices compared to peripheral regional analgesia in elective total hip arthroplasty. The quality of evidence for these positive effects was low. Intrathecal morphine reduced the systemic opioid consumption, but is not in itself an opioid free strategy. This notion is supported by the increased incidence of in hospital pruritus with intrathecal morphine. The quality of evidence for this was high. In view of the quality of evidence, high quality randomised controlled trials are required to substantiate these results.

Humans↗