Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “intravenous ketamine”

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.

71 recordsLinked to original sources

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&#xa0;mg/kg) or placebo (0.9% saline) 24&#xa0;h apart, alongside usual care and medication. Psychological and physical pain were assessed at baseline, repeatedly during 96&#xa0;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&#xa0;=&#xa0;73) or placebo (n&#xa0;=&#xa0;83). Psychological pain decreased in both groups but was lower with ketamine during the first 96&#xa0;h. Pointwise scores were lower with ketamine from 40&#xa0;min to 96&#xa0;h, largest at 40&#xa0;min, 2&#xa0;h, 4&#xa0;h, and 24&#xa0;h (all p&#xa0;<&#xa0;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&#xa0;h. Ketamine may represent a clinically relevant option as a psychological pain reliever in psychiatric patients.

Humans

Ketamine assisted psychotherapy to reduce chronic neuropathic pain: A mixed-methods randomized pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous ketamine can provide short-term analgesia in chronic neuropathic pain but benefits often wane after treatment. We conducted a randomized pilot trial to assess the feasibility of combining ketamine infusions with psychotherapy to inform future efficacy trials. METHODS: In this single-center, randomized, outcome-assessor-blinded pilot trial at a Canadian tertiary pain clinic, adults with moderate-to-severe chronic neuropathic pain were randomly assigned in 1:1:1 ratio to the ketamine, psychotherapy, or combined ketamine plus psychotherapy arm. Ketamine was delivered as three intravenous infusions over 16 weeks; psychotherapy consisted of 16 weekly cognitive behavioral therapy and mindfulness-based meditation sessions. The primary outcome was feasibility, assessed using prespecified progression criteria. Exploratory outcomes included changes in pain interference (PROMIS 6a T-score), pain intensity, mood, and qualitative interview findings at week 20 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05639322). FINDINGS: Between October 23, 2023, and March 31, 2025, 30 participants were randomized, and 26 (87%) completed 20-week follow-up. Most feasibility criteria, including consent, retention, data completeness, and absence of study-related serious adverse events, were met; adherence targets were partially met. Exploratory pain outcomes showed numerical improvement across groups, with clinically meaningful reductions observed for pain interference and pain intensity. Sixty-four adverse events were recorded, mostly mild and in ketamine-containing groups; no serious study-related adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Combined ketamine and psychotherapy was feasible and acceptably safe in this pilot trial, supporting evaluation in a larger efficacy-powered study. FUNDING: The study was funded by the St. Michael's Hospital Innovation Fund, The Canadian Pain Society Early Investigator Award and the Physician Services Incorporation Early Career Researcher Award.

Humans

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&#xa0;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&#x2009;mg&#xb7;kg-1&#xb7;h-1 during anesthesia, followed by 1&#x2009;mg&#xb7;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&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.008) and POD3 (0.0% versus 15.8%, relative risk 0.00, 95% CI: 0.00-0.47, p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.031) compared with placebo. The incidences of anxiety on POD1 and 3 and sleep disturbances on POD1 were also significantly reduced (p&#x2009;<&#x2009;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

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

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

Humans

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

Ketamine Plus Midazolam versus Fentanyl Plus Midazolam for Sedation and Analgesia during Image-guided Procedures in Interventional Radiology: Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background Opioid-benzodiazepine regimens remain common for radiologist-administered procedural sedation despite respiratory and analgesic effectiveness concerns. Purpose To compare intraprocedural pain and patient-reported experience between ketamine/midazolam and fentanyl/midazolam during image-guided procedural sedation. Materials and Methods This randomized clinical trial was conducted at a single academic center between June 2025 and February 2026. Adults undergoing image-guided lung or bone biopsy or abscess drainage were randomized to fentanyl/midazolam or ketamine/midazolam administered by interventional radiologists. Procedures were performed using US, CT, CT fluoroscopy, or combined CT and US guidance. The primary outcome was maximum intraprocedural pain (0-10 on the Numeric Rating Scale). Secondary outcomes included sedation depth, physiologic parameters, oxygen desaturation, patient-reported experience assessed using a modified Heidelberg questionnaire, and complications. Results Among 264 randomized procedures (132 procedures per group) in 260 participants (median age, 68 years [IQR, 61-75 years]; 135 [52%] female), ketamine/midazolam resulted in lower maximum intraprocedural pain than fentanyl/midazolam (mean difference, -1.4 points [95% CI: -2.0, -0.8]; P < .001). Pain scores greater than 4 occurred less frequently with ketamine/midazolam (2.3% vs 17%; absolute difference, 14 percentage points [95% CI: 8, 21]; P < .001). Ketamine/midazolam was associated with higher nadir oxygen saturation (mean difference, +1.4% [95% CI: 0.6, 2.2]; P = .001) and fewer oxygen desaturation events below 90% (three [2.3%] vs 13 [9.8%]; absolute difference, 7.6 percentage points [95% CI: 1.9, 13.3]; P = .02). Ketamine/midazolam produced deeper sedation and higher intraprocedural systolic blood pressure. Hallucinations occurred more frequently with ketamine/midazolam (15 [11.4%] vs five [3.8%]; absolute difference, 7.6 percentage points [95% CI: 1.3, 13.9]; P = .03), though overall procedural comfort, reduced recall, and perceived adequacy of sedation were improved. Procedure-related and sedation-related complications did not differ between groups. Conclusion Radiologist-administered ketamine/midazolam during image-guided procedural sedation improved analgesia and patient-reported experience with fewer hypoxemic events and no increase in complications compared with fentanyl/midazolam. Clinical trial registration no. NCT07040163

Aged

Subacute and long-term changes in cognitive functioning after administration of classic psychedelics, MDMA and ketamine: A systematic review of clinical and preclinical evidence.

Psychedelic agents induce a window of heightened neuroplasticity that extends beyond acute intoxication, during which neural circuits are more amenable to change. This period may facilitate changes in cognition relevant to the treatment of psychiatric disorders. This systematic review synthesised clinical and preclinical evidence of subacute and long-term (&#x2265;1&#x202f;day) effects of classic and non-classic psychedelics on cognition. MEDLINE, EMBASE, APA PsycInfo and Web of Science were searched to identify human and animal studies investigating psychedelics and cognition (executive function, attention, decision-making). Sixty-seven (47 clinical, 20 preclinical) articles met inclusion criteria. Psilocybin demonstrated the most consistent evidence of subacute and longer-term cognitive improvement, particularly in cognitive flexibility and attention. Ketamine showed enhancement across cognitive domains, although findings were heterogeneous. LSD and DMT showed no consistent subacute changes, while MDMA was associated with transient cognitive impairments that resolved within days. Risk of bias assessments revealed selective outcome reporting, poor reporting of missing data and inadequate methodological detail, limiting the confidence of findings. Current evidence provides preliminary support for subacute changes in cognition following administration of select psychedelic agents. Cognitive improvements were more frequently seen in psychiatric populations than healthy subjects, which may reflect a remediation of existing cognitive deficit rather than enhancement above normal functioning. Adequately powered, controlled studies with standardised reporting of cognitive outcomes are required to determine the magnitude, durability and clinical relevance of psychedelic-associated cognitive change.

Hallucinogens

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 ketofol versus Fentanyl-Midazolam sedation on neurological recovery in traumatic brain Injury: A randomised study.

Neurological recovery after traumatic brain injury (TBI) is multifactorial, and sedation is a cornerstone of neurocritical care because of its neuroprotective role. Although ketofol is widely used for anaesthesia, its effectiveness as a sedative regimen in the intensive care unit (ICU) has not been well studied. This preliminary exploratory double-blind, randomised study compared ketofol (KP) with fentanyl-midazolam (FM) sedation in adults with moderate-to-severe TBI. Sedation was administered for 72&#xa0;h and titrated to a Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score&#xa0;&#x2264;&#xa0;&#xa0;-&#xa0;3. The primary outcome was the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) at 30&#xa0;days. Secondary outcomes included GOSE at 90&#xa0;days, incidence of propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS), duration of mechanical ventilation, haemodynamic stability, and ICU and hospital length of stay. Of 120 enrolled patients, 111 were included in the final analysis (57 FM, 54 KP). Baseline characteristics, including injury severity and Marshall CT scores, were comparable. At 30&#xa0;days, good neurological recovery (GOSE 7-8) was more frequent in the KP group than the FM group (26% vs. 10.5%, p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.03). At 90&#xa0;days, recovery remained higher with KP (44.4% vs. 33.3%), though the difference was not statistically significant (p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.16). Multivariate analysis confirmed ketofol as an independent predictor of good recovery at 30&#xa0;days (adjusted OR 3.63, 95% CI 1.11-11.85, p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.033). No PRIS occurred, and secondary outcomes were similar. Ketofol-based sedation was safe and may be associated with improved early neurological recovery compared with fentanyl-midazolam, with a favourable trend toward improved long-term neurological recovery.

Humans

Effects of low-dose esketamine on early quality of recovery following minimally invasive esophagectomy: a multicenter, randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) frequently experience moderate-to-severe postoperative pain and anxiety-depressive symptoms, compromising postoperative quality of recovery (QoR). Esketamine is a promising adjunct for analgesia and anxiolysis; however, the effect of low-dose esketamine on patient-centered recovery outcomes in MIE remains unclear. METHODS: In this double-blinded, multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients scheduled for elective McKeown esophagectomy were allocated to esketamine (0.25&#x2009;mg/kg loading dose and 0.125&#x2009;mg/kg/h continuous infusion during surgery) or placebo (equivalent volume and rate of saline). The primary outcome was the QoR-15 score on postoperative day (POD) 2. Secondary outcomes included QoR-15 scores on POD 1, 3, 7 and 30. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Anxiety Subscale (HADS-A) and Depression Subscale (HADS-D) scores, numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores, and the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) scores on POD 1 to 3, and safety evaluations. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients were analyzed (esketamine, n&#x2009;=&#x2009;98; placebo, n&#x2009;=&#x2009;100). Intraoperative esketamine significantly improved QoR-15 scores on POD 2 (116.9&#x2009;&#xb1;&#x2009;9.4 vs. 110.2&#x2009;&#xb1;&#x2009;9.8, p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001) and POD 3 (123.6&#x2009;&#xb1;&#x2009;7.2 vs. 116.8&#x2009;&#xb1;&#x2009;8.4, p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001) compared with placebo. HADS-A and HADS-D scores were lower in the esketamine group on POD 1 to 3 (all p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001). Additionally, esketamine recipients reported significantly lower NRS scores at rest and during movement and BPI scores for pain severity and pain interference items (all p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative low-dose esketamine improved early, patient-reported recovery after MIE by enhancing analgesia and reducing postoperative anxiety and depression without increasing adverse events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Register (identifier: ChiCTR2400088916).

Humans

Esketamine vs. sufentanil for quality of recovery after outpatient gynecological surgery: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative administration of esketamine has been reported to improve early quality of recovery (QoR). However, data on its effects in outpatient surgery are limited. This study aimed to assess the impact of esketamine on QoR in patients undergoing outpatient gynecological procedures. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomized clinical trial, patients aged 18-65&#x2009;years scheduled for outpatient gynecological surgery under sedation were allocated to receive esketamine (0.2&#x2009;mg/kg) or sufentanil (0.1&#x2009;&#x3bc;g/kg) combined with propofol (1.5-3&#x2009;mg/kg). The primary outcome was quality of recovery on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes included quality of recovery on POD2, sedation success rate, length of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, injection pain, postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, patient and clinician satisfaction, sleep quality, and anxiety and depression. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were randomized, with 63 assigned to the esketamine group and 63 to the sufentanil group. Of these, 125 patients were included in the final analysis (62 in the esketamine group and 63 in the sufentanil group), as one patient lacked follow-up data. The mean (SD) QoR-15 score on POD1 was 137.9 (14.5) in the esketamine group and 137.8 (10.7) in the sufentanil group, with no significant difference between groups (absolute difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -4.2 to 4.6; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.93). For secondary outcomes, the esketamine group had a longer PACU stay (median, 28.0 vs. 23.0&#x2009;min; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001), a lower incidence of severe injection pain (22.6% vs. 50.8%; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.002), a higher proportion of patients with pain scores &#x2265; 4 at 30&#x2009;min postoperatively (30.6% vs. 6.3%; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.001), and higher fatigue scores (median, 3.0 vs. 2.0; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.01). Other secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing sedation for outpatient gynecological procedures, esketamine did not significantly improve quality of recovery on POD1 compared to sufentanil. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2500098466.

Humans

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 &#x2265;60&#x2009;years undergoing elective, short-duration surgery (anticipated duration of less than 90&#x2009;min) were randomized 1:1 to receive either OFA (n&#x2009;=&#x2009;200) or OBA (n&#x2009;=&#x2009;200). The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative hypoxemia, delirium, or nausea and vomiting (PONV) within 48&#x2009;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&#x2009;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

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&#x2005;mg/kg/day, increased to 8&#x2005;mg/kg/day if pain reduction was <30% after 24&#x2005;h) or placebo for 48&#x2005;h. Pain intensity was assessed using the Numeric Pain Intensity Scale, with a clinically meaningful response defined as a&#x2009;&#x2265;30% reduction from baseline at 40&#x2005;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&#x2005;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

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&#xb7;kg-&#xb9; 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 &#x3bc;g/mL. The concentration was then adjusted in steps of 0.5 &#x3bc;g/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 &#x3bc;g/mL, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 3.04-3.59 vs. 3.89 &#x3bc;g/mL, 95% CI: 3.50-4.28). Under the study protocol, the lidocaine group also required less propofol (8.62 mg&#xb7;kg-1&#xb7;h-1, 95% CI: 8.10-9.15 vs. 9.89 mg&#xb7;kg-1&#xb7;h-1, 95% CI: 9.05-10.73) and less remifentanil (0.23 &#x3bc;g&#xb7;kg-1&#xb7;min-1, 95% CI: 0.21-0.24 vs. 0.27 &#x3bc;g&#xb7;kg-1&#xb7;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

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&#x202f;mg) or two subcutaneous doses (300 and 600&#x202f;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&#x202f;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

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 &#x2265;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&#x223c;2.75] vs. 3.25 &#xb1; 2.40, p = 0.003), anxiety (1 [IQR: 0&#x223c;2.75] vs. 4 [IQR: 3&#x223c;6], p = 0.001), and experienced discomfort (2 [IQR: 1&#x223c;3.75] vs. 4.15 &#xb1; 2.16, p = 0.016), and shortened perceived treatment duration (2.90 &#xb1; 2.34 vs. 5 [IQR: 4&#x223c;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 &#xb1; 13.32 vs. 144.11 &#xb1; 17.42 mmHg, p < 0.001), DBP (73.21 &#xb1; 10.28 vs. 82.37 &#xb1; 11.03 mmHg, p = 0.012), and HR (71.00 [IQR: 62.50&#x223c;79.25] vs. 85.00 &#xb1; 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

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&#x2005;mg/kg in 100&#x2005;mL saline or placebo 10&#x2005;min before incision. The primary outcome was total blood loss within 24&#x2005;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 &#xb1; standard deviation: 221.1 &#xb1; 72.4 vs 298.1 &#xb1; 90.6&#x2005;mL; mean difference -77.0&#x2005;mL; 95% CI, -122.4 to -31.6; P = .001). Intraoperative loss and 24&#x2005;h drain output were also reduced. Postoperative D-dimer rise was attenuated with TXA (0.31 &#xb1; 0.15 vs 0.49 &#xb1; 0.22&#x2005;&#xb5;g/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

Intravenous thrombolysis for ischemic stroke in extended time window selected with CT perfusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have provided new evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) presenting within the extended time window (ETW). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IVT, in patients treated within the ETW and selected with perfusion imaging criteria, predominantly computed tomography perfusion (CTP). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis, registered in PROSPERO, was conducted including all available RCTs comparing IVT with best medical treatment (BMT) in patients with AIS within the ETW, selected using advanced perfusion imaging criteria. The predefined efficacy outcomes were excellent functional outcome and good functional outcome at 3 months. The safety endpoints included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and all-cause mortality at 90 days. RESULTS: Six RCTs, including 1182 patients treated with IVT and 1176 patients receiving BMT, were included. IVT was associated with a higher likelihood of achieving excellent and good functional outcomes at 3 months. Exploratory subgroup analyses by treatment timing suggested consistent findings up to 24 hours. No significant difference in 90-day mortality was observed between groups, whereas IVT was associated with an increased risk of sICH. CONCLUSION: Treatment with IVT in the ETW (4.5-24 h) in patients selected using advanced perfusion imaging, predominantly CTP, may be associated with improved functional outcomes in patients with AIS. Although IVT was associated with an increased risk of sICH, no significant increase in 90-day mortality was observed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD420261304314.

Aged