Comparison of intraoperative fentanyl with dexmedetomidine for perioperative analgesia and opioid consumption during craniotomies: A randomised controlled pilot study with non‐inferiority design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Moderate to severe pain is common despite the use of potent opioids during craniotomies. Non-opioid agents such as dexmedetomidine reduce undesirable opioid effects and are successfully used as primary analgesic during bariatric surgeries. This study assessed the feasibility of conducting a large randomised controlled trial comparing fentanyl with dexmedetomidine for perioperative analgesia during craniotomy. Methods This was a prospective single-centre randomised controlled feasibility trial. Twenty-four consenting adult patients undergoing supratentorial craniotomy at NIMHANS, Bangalore, India, were recruited after ethical approval in March and April 2018. They received either fentanyl 1 µg kg−1 h−1 (n = 12) or dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg kg−1 h−1 (n = 12) as primary intraoperative analgesic drug. Patient, anaesthesiologist, outcome assessor and data analyst were blinded to the study intervention. Our feasibility outcomes (primary) were recruitment and adherence rates. We also explored the potential efficacy of intervention and adverse events. Results We recruited 24 out of 30 eligible patients and had 100% protocol adherence, thereby demonstrating the feasibility of a larger randomised controlled trial. All 24 patients completed the study. The demographic and clinical parameters were similar between the groups. Compared between fentanyl and dexmedetomidine, there was no difference in the intraoperative fentanyl (top-up) consumption (µg), expressed as median and interquartile range: 25 (0-50) and 0 (0-50); P = 0.844; and no difference in postoperative pain at 15 and 60 minutes. Adverse events were few and similar with fentanyl and dexmedetomidine. Conclusions A large-scale randomised controlled trial of perioperative dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl is feasible. Dexmedetomidine has the potential to be non-inferior to fentanyl for perioperative analgesia during craniotomies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".