Opioid-free versus opioid-based anesthesia in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a single-center, randomized, controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Opioids are commonly used in general anesthesia for pain management. However, they are linked to significant side effects. Patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, particularly those with obesity, are at higher risk of experiencing adverse effects associated with opioids. Therefore, there is a need to explore alternative anesthesia options that do not rely on opioids. This study aims to investigate the efficacy of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) compared to traditional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: This single-center randomized controlled trial included eighty-three patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in a tertiary hospital. Patients were randomly assigned to dexmedetomidine and lidocaine infusion (OFA) or remifentanil (OBA). All patients received intra-operative propofol, sevoflurane, a neuromuscular blocking agent, and ketamine. The primary outcome included opioid consumption during the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Secondary measures included intraoperative hemodynamic stability, time to extubation, PACU stay duration, opioid consumption during the first 48 h, and anti-emetic requirements. Independent samples t-test or Mann-Whitney U test was used to assess for differences across the two groups. RESULTS: PACU morphine consumption, total postoperative morphine consumption, anti-emetic requirements up to 48 h after surgery, and pain levels after surgery were not statistically significantly different between OFA and OBA groups. Other variables were not statistically different between the two groups, except for intraoperative anti-hypertensives where more patients in the OFA groups required it. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid-free anesthesia hasn't shown an opioid-sparing effect in patients with obesity undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Larger multi-center studies are required to fully establish its effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03507634); first trial registration date: 12/04/2018; first posted date: 25/04/2018.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".