Safety and Efficacy of Esketamine Weak Opioid Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Gallbladder Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Esketamine, a non-competitive antagonist of the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor, plays significance in multimodal analgesia due to its potent analgesic, sedative, and anti-inflammatory properties. Recent studies, however, contradict the belief that laparoscopic surgery notably reduces postoperative pain compared to traditional surgeries. The potential opioid-sparing effects of intravenous esketamine, along with its impact on oxidative stress, inflammatory responses, and cognitive function during laparoscopic surgery, remain unexplored. Methods: In this study, ninety patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into three groups, each comprising thirty patients: a normal saline control group (NS), a low-dose esketamine group (LS), and a high-dose esketamine group (HS). The LS and HS groups were administered a 0.5 mg/kg esketamine injection before the initial skin incision, followed by esketamine infusions at 2 µg/kg·min and 4 µg/kg·min respectively. Conversely, the NS control group received an intravenous dose of 0.5 mg/kg saline before the first skin incision, followed by a continuous saline infusion at a rate of 2 µg/kg·min. Subsequently, we monitored several parameters: the hemodynamic responses, levels of stress and inflammatory responses, intraoperative doses of sufentanil, remifentanil, and propofol, as well as sufentanil dosage administered in the 24 hours postoperative. We also evaluated alterations in cognitive function, perioperative indicators, and potential adverse reactions among the three groups. Results: Compared to their levels five minutes prior to anesthesia (T₀) and thirty minutes post-operation (T₄), the NS group exhibited a more significant decrease in Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) and Heart Rate (HR) at the various time intervals: five minutes after the skin incision (T₁), thirty minutes post-incision (T₂), and at the conclusion of the operation (T₃), when compared to both the LS and HS groups (P < 0.05). Additionally, the LS and HS groups required lower doses of propofol, remifentanil, and sufentanil compared to the NS group during the operation (P < 0.05). At T₁, T₂, and T₃, the NS group exhibited elevated levels of adrenaline (AD), noradrenaline (NE), and endothelin (ET) compared to T₀ and T₄. However, the LS and HS groups had lower AD, NE, and ET levels at T₁, T₂, and T₃ compared to the NS group (P< 0.05). In all groups (NS, LS, and HS), serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and interleukin-6 (IL-6) were elevated at T₁, T₂, and T₃ in comparison to levels at T₀ and T₄. Yet, the LS and HS groups had lower CRP, TNF-α, and IL-6 levels at T₁, T₂, and T₃ compared to the NS group (P < 0.05). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores of all three groups decreased 24 hours after the operation, however, they were notably higher in the LS and HS groups compared to the NS group (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the recovery time was shorter, and the incidence of nausea, vomiting, and respiratory depression was lower in the LS and HS groups compared to the NS group (P< 0.05). Conclusion: The administration of low-dose esketamine has been shown to be safe, effective, and dependable in the context of laparoscopic gallbladder surgery. It has the capacity to stabilize hemodynamic responses, ameliorate both stress and inflammatory reactions induced by surgical procedures, and expedite the recovery period from anesthesia. Furthermore, it fosters the restoration of postoperative cognitive function. Notably, when used in conjunction with nalbuphine, low-dose esketamine exhibits opioid-sparing properties, thereby reducing the incidence of postoperative adverse effects. Trial registration: The trial is registered with the China Clinical Trials Registry Registration Number: ChiCTR2300067596. Retrospectively registered (date of registration: 12/01/2023).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".