Transcutaneous electric acupoint stimulation reduced consumption of profopol in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Propofol is a common regimen for general anesthesia maintenance. But propofol can dose-dependently generate cardiopulmonary depression. Thus, any strategy to reduce propofol dosage during laparoscopic surgery may have underlying beneficial effect for patient prognosis. Previous studies indicated both analgesic and sedative effect of acupoint stimulation. However, its main sedative effect on patients under general anesthesia remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the sedative effect of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) on patients scheduled for laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: In this randomized clinical trial, patients scheduled for laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia in Xijing hospital were randomly assigned to 3 groups, receiving electrical stimulation at the Shenmen (HT7)/Ximen (PC4) (TEAS group), stimulation at the shoulder (non-acupoint group) or no stimulation (control group), respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: One hundred sixty-two patients completed the study. The primary outcome was the consumption of propofol, and secondary outcomes included features of recovery after surgery, major complications after surgery and by 1 year after surgery. RESULTS: In patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery, the doses of propofol decreased significantly in the TEAS group compared (0.10 ±â€…0.02 mg·kg-1·min-1) with the other 2 groups (both 0.12 ±â€…0.02 mg·kg-1·min-1, P < .001). The mean differences (95% confidence interval) for non-acupoint versus TEAS and control versus TEAS were 0.021 (0.012, 0.030) and 0.024 (0.013, 0.034), respectively. Time to awake and to extubation were not significantly different among the groups. The incidences of major complications after surgery and by 1 year after surgery were not significantly different among the groups. CONCLUSION: TEAS could induce additional sedative effect in patients during laparoscopic surgery and reduce propofol consumption.

Cardiopulmonary Adverse Events of Remimazolam versus Propofol During Cervical Conization: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the cardiopulmonary safety of remimazolam and propofol in patients undergoing cervical conization. Methods: This was a single-blind, parallel, randomized controlled study. A total of 204 patients scheduled for day surgery of cold knife cervical conization received either remimazolam-alfentanil anesthesia (remimazolam group) or propofol-alfentanil anesthesia (propofol group). The primary outcome was the incidence of intraoperative cardiopulmonary adverse events (a composite outcome of hypotension, bradycardia and hypoxemia). The occurrence of hypotension, bradycardia, hypoxemia and the degree of body movement were secondary outcomes, as well as the moment at which consciousness was lost, the interval between the end of anesthesia and the operating room's release of the patient, and the overall dosage of alfentanil administered during the procedure. Results: The incidence of intraoperative cardiopulmonary adverse events was 45 (44.1%) in the remimazolam group and 72 (70.6%) in the propofol group (absolute risk difference [95% CI], -26.47% [-39.55% to -13.39%]; odds ratio (OR) [95% CI], 0.43 [0.28 to 0.65]; P < 0.001). The remimazolam group showed lower incidences of hypotension and hypoxemia compared to the propofol group (P = 0.01 for both). No significant differences were observed in the overall alfentanil dosages administered, bradycardia, bodily movement, or time to losing consciousness between the two groups. Conclusion: In patients who underwent cold knife cervical conization, remimazolam-alfentanil anesthesia was associated with a reduced incidence of intraoperative cardiopulmonary adverse events compared with propofol-alfentanil anesthesia.

Effects of hydromorphone-based intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with and without a low basal infusion on postoperative hypoxaemia: study protocol for a randomised controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: When patients receive patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA), no basal infusion is always recommended, as the addition of a basal infusion increases the occurrence of postoperative opioid-induced respiratory depression. However, few studies have investigated whether low basal infusions increase the incidence of postoperative hypoxaemia relative to no basal infusion. We intend to conduct a clinical trial to test the hypothesis that PCIA with a low basal infusion does not increase the occurrence of postoperative hypoxaemia relative to PCIA with no basal infusion. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This single-centre parallel randomised controlled clinical trial will be conducted with 160 patients undergoing gastrointestinal tumour surgery. The assigned nurse will set analgesic pumps (low or no basal infusion PCIA) according to block-based randomisation sequence. Other investigators and all participants will be blinded to intervention allocation. All patients will be monitored continuously with the ep pod, a wireless wearable device, recording of oxygen saturation (SpO2) and daily ambulation duration for 48 hours postoperatively. Three follow-up evaluations will be conducted to assess the analgesic effect (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain score) and opioid-related side effects (Overall Benefit of Analgesic Score (OBAS)). The primary outcome will be the area under the curve for hypoxaemia (defined as SpO2<95%) per hour. The secondary outcomes will be the areas under the curve for hypoxaemia defined as SpO2<90% and <85% per hour, hydromorphone consumption, OBASs at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively, NRS scores at 4, 24 and 48 hours postoperatively, and the ambulation time per hour over 48 hours. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Xijing Hospital Ethics Committee (KY20212163-F-1). Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients or their authorised surrogates. All data will be managed with confidentiality. Findings will be disseminated at international conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2100054317.

Sufentanil Combined with Nalbuphine via Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia After Cesarean Section: A Retrospective Evaluation.

Purpose: This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy, opioid consumption, and safety profile of two patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) regimens (sufentanil combined with nalbuphine vs sufentanil alone) after cesarean section (CS). Patients and Methods: Parturients (n = 1808) received sufentanil combined with nalbuphine (SN group) or sufentanil alone (S group) as PCIA after CS. The primary outcome was the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score with movement (NRS-M) at 24 h after CS. Secondary outcomes were NRS scores at rest (NRS-R) at 24 and 48 h after CS, NRS-M at 48 h after CS, cumulative PCIA bolus times, and opioid consumption during the first 24 and 48 h postoperatively, which was measured in morphine-equivalent doses. Results: The population comprised 993 and 815 subjects in the SN and S groups, respectively. At 24 and 48 h after CS, the respective NRS-M scores of the SN group (4.62, 3.37) were each significantly lower than those of the S group (5.18, 4.01; P < 0.01 for both). The corresponding NRS-S scores were similarly lower in the SN group (0.96, 0.19) than in the S group (2.05, 0.92; P < 0.01 for both). After adjusting for covariates, the SN group still had lower NRS-M than the S group at 24 h after CS (estimate adjusted = 0.565, P < 0.001). The PCIA bolus times were significantly lower in the SN group than in the S group. The rates of bradycardia and respiratory depression were lower in the SN group than in the S group. However, the rates of dizziness and postoperative hypotension were slightly higher in the SN group, and those of nausea/vomiting were comparable. Conclusion: Compared with sufentanil alone, sufentanil combined with nalbuphine for PCIA provided superior analgesia in parturient women after CS.