Sufentanil durante a indução da anestesia intravenosa total à base de remifentanil: ensaio clínico randômico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A dor pós‐operatória é uma grande preocupação quando o remifentanil é usado para anestesia intravenosa total devido à sua meia‐vida ultracurta. Os opioides de ação mais longa, como o sufentanil, têm sido usados durante a indução de anestesia intravenosa total à base de remifentanil como um meio de superar essa deficiência. Porém, a eficácia e segurança de tal estratégia ainda precisam de evidências advindas de ensaios clínicos randômicos. Portanto, objetivamos avaliar a eficácia analgésica e a segurança pós‐operatória de uma dose única de sufentanil administrada durante a indução de anestesia intravenosa total à base de remifentanil. Quarenta pacientes eletivamente agendados para cirurgia abdominal aberta foram randomizados para receber anestesia intravenosa total à base de remifentanil, com ou sem uma dose única de sufentanil, após a indução da anestesia. Avaliamos o consumo de morfina no pós‐operatório, administrado através de uma bomba de analgesia controlada pelo paciente. Os escores de dor autorrelatados e a ocorrência de náusea, vômito, prurido, agitação, sonolência e depressão respiratória também foram avaliados até dois dias após a cirurgia. A diferença média entre os grupos sufentanil e controle em relação ao consumo de morfina em sala de recuperação pós‐anestesia e após 12, 24 e 48 horas da cirurgia foi de ‐7,2 mg (IC 95%: ‐12,5 a ‐2,1, p < 0,001), ‐3,9 mg (IC 95%: ‐11,9 a 4,7, p = 0,26), ‐0,6 mg (IC 95%: (‐12,7 a 12,7, p = 0,80) e ‐1,8 mg (IC 95%: ‐11,6 para 15,6, p = 0,94), respectivamente. Não houve diferença significativa tanto nos escores de dor autorrelatados, quanto na incidência de eventos adversos entre os grupos. Nossos achados sugerem que a administração de sufentanil durante a indução de anestesia intravenosa total à base de remifentanil está associada à redução do consumo de opioides no pós‐operatório imediato. Postoperative pain represents an important concern when remifentanil is used for total intravenous anesthesia because of its ultrashort half‐life. Longer acting opioids, such as sufentanil, have been used during induction of remifentanil‐based total intravenous anesthesia as a means to overcome this shortcoming. However, the effectiveness and safety of such strategy still lacks evidence from randomized clinical trials. Hence, we aimed to assess the postoperative analgesic efficacy and safety of a single dose of sufentanil administered during the induction of remifentanil‐based total intravenous anesthesia. Forty patients, scheduled for elective open abdominal surgery, were randomized to receive remifentanil‐based total intravenous anesthesia with or without a single dose of sufentanil upon induction. We assessed the postoperative morphine consumption administered through a patient‐controlled analgesia pump. Self‐reported pain scores and the occurrence of nausea, vomiting, pruritus, agitation, somnolence and respiratory depression were also assessed up to 2 days after surgery. The mean difference between the sufentanil and control groups regarding morphine consumption in the post‐anesthetic care unit and at 12, 24 and 48 h after surgery were −7.2 mg (95%CI: −12.5 to −2.1, p < 0.001), −3.9 mg (95%CI: −11.9 to 4.7, p = 0.26), −0.6 mg (95%CI: (−12.7 to 12.7, p = 0.80), and −1.8 mg (95%CI: (−11.6 to 15.6, p = 0.94), respectively. Neither self‐reported pain nor the incidence of adverse events were significantly different between groups at any time point. Our findings suggest that the administration of sufentanil during induction of remifentanil‐based total intravenous anesthesia is associated with decreased early postoperative opioid consumption.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".