Opioid-Free versus Opioid-Sparing Anesthesia for Postoperative Pain and Early Recovery After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Pain Research Pub Date : 2025-04-23 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JPR.S506147
Miaomiao Xiong, Yao Liu, Yingsi Liang, Hailang Wang, Lili Zhang, Zhongjun Zhang, Ming Fang
{"title":"Opioid-Free versus Opioid-Sparing Anesthesia for Postoperative Pain and Early Recovery After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Miaomiao Xiong, Yao Liu, Yingsi Liang, Hailang Wang, Lili Zhang, Zhongjun Zhang, Ming Fang","doi":"10.2147/JPR.S506147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Enhanced recovery after surgery emphasizes effective analgesia while minimal opioid use. Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA) have been shown to enhance recovery by reducing opioid-induced side effects. This study compared the efficacy of OFA and OSA in managing postoperative pain and recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A single-center, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 86 adults undergoing LC. Patients received either OSA (sufentanil/remifentanil) or OFA (no opioids). Both groups received propofol, esketamine, dexmedetomidine, and erector spinae plane block. The primary outcome was pain area under the curve (AUCVAS) within 36 hours postsurgery. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamics, recovery times and bowel function.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one patients (41 and 40 in the OFA and OSA groups, respectively) completed the study. The AUCVAS scores were similar between the OFA (7.3 ± 1.4) and OSA (6.9 ± 1.3) groups (P = 0.201), the difference in AUCVAS between the two groups was 0.384 (95% CI: -0.296, 1.064), which was significantly below the preset noninferiority threshold of 1.0, demonstrating the noninferiority of OFA. While early pain scores within the first 12 hours postanesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge were slightly higher in the OFA group, but overall pain control was sufficient in both groups. The VAS scores from PACU discharge to 36 hours postoperatively, intraoperative hemodynamic variables, and the need for rescue analgesia were comparable. OFA patients experienced a faster bowel recovery (13.8 ± 2.4 vs 15.5 ± 2.3 hours, P = 0.002). Recovery times, postoperative QoR-40 scores, and patient satisfaction were similar between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OFA is noninferior to OSA in pain management and hemodynamic stability, with faster bowel recovery after LC.</p>","PeriodicalId":16661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain Research","volume":"18 ","pages":"2137-2146"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12035407/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S506147","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Enhanced recovery after surgery emphasizes effective analgesia while minimal opioid use. Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA) have been shown to enhance recovery by reducing opioid-induced side effects. This study compared the efficacy of OFA and OSA in managing postoperative pain and recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Patients and methods: A single-center, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 86 adults undergoing LC. Patients received either OSA (sufentanil/remifentanil) or OFA (no opioids). Both groups received propofol, esketamine, dexmedetomidine, and erector spinae plane block. The primary outcome was pain area under the curve (AUCVAS) within 36 hours postsurgery. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamics, recovery times and bowel function.

Results: Eighty-one patients (41 and 40 in the OFA and OSA groups, respectively) completed the study. The AUCVAS scores were similar between the OFA (7.3 ± 1.4) and OSA (6.9 ± 1.3) groups (P = 0.201), the difference in AUCVAS between the two groups was 0.384 (95% CI: -0.296, 1.064), which was significantly below the preset noninferiority threshold of 1.0, demonstrating the noninferiority of OFA. While early pain scores within the first 12 hours postanesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge were slightly higher in the OFA group, but overall pain control was sufficient in both groups. The VAS scores from PACU discharge to 36 hours postoperatively, intraoperative hemodynamic variables, and the need for rescue analgesia were comparable. OFA patients experienced a faster bowel recovery (13.8 ± 2.4 vs 15.5 ± 2.3 hours, P = 0.002). Recovery times, postoperative QoR-40 scores, and patient satisfaction were similar between the groups.

Conclusion: OFA is noninferior to OSA in pain management and hemodynamic stability, with faster bowel recovery after LC.

无阿片类药物与保留阿片类药物麻醉对腹腔镜胆囊切除术后疼痛和早期恢复的影响:一项随机对照试验。
目的:加强术后恢复强调有效的镇痛,同时尽量减少阿片类药物的使用。无阿片类药物麻醉(OFA)和保留阿片类药物麻醉(OSA)已被证明可以通过减少阿片类药物引起的副作用来促进康复。本研究比较了OFA和OSA在腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)术后疼痛和恢复方面的疗效。患者和方法:86名接受LC的成人进行了一项单中心随机对照试验。患者接受OSA(舒芬太尼/瑞芬太尼)或OFA(无阿片类药物)治疗。两组均给予异丙酚、艾氯胺酮、右美托咪定和竖脊肌平面阻滞。主要观察指标为术后36小时疼痛曲线下面积(AUCVAS)。次要结局包括血流动力学、恢复时间和肠功能。结果:81例患者(OFA组41例,OSA组40例)完成了研究。OFA组AUCVAS评分(7.3±1.4)与OSA组AUCVAS评分(6.9±1.3)相近(P = 0.201),两组AUCVAS评分差异为0.384 (95% CI: -0.296, 1.064),显著低于预设的非劣效阈值1.0,表明OFA具有非劣效性。虽然OFA组在麻醉后护理单元(PACU)出院的前12小时内的早期疼痛评分略高,但两组的总体疼痛控制都足够。PACU出院至术后36小时的VAS评分、术中血流动力学变量和抢救镇痛需求具有可比性。OFA患者肠道恢复更快(13.8±2.4 vs 15.5±2.3小时,P = 0.002)。两组间恢复时间、术后QoR-40评分和患者满意度相似。结论:OFA在疼痛管理和血流动力学稳定性方面不逊于OSA, LC后肠道恢复更快。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pain Research
Journal of Pain Research CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
411
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pain Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that welcomes laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Original research, reviews, symposium reports, hypothesis formation and commentaries are all considered for publication. Additionally, the journal now welcomes the submission of pain-policy-related editorials and commentaries, particularly in regard to ethical, regulatory, forensic, and other legal issues in pain medicine, and to the education of pain practitioners and researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信