Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39500840›Full record

SynthesisCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2024

Opioid-free anesthesia for minimally invasive abdominal surgery: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.

Carlos A B da Silveira, Ana C D Rasador, Heitor J S Medeiros, Eric Slawka, Lucca Gesteira, Lucas C Pereira, Sara Amaral

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. The 90% effective dose (EDBMC anesthesiology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Opioid-free anesthesia in research and practice: so near yet so far!Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Carlos A B da SilveiraDignity Health St. Joseph's Hospital, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Ana C D RasadorBahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Heitor J S MedeirosDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachussets General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Eric SlawkaFederal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Lucca GesteiraSão Rafael Hospital, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Lucas C PereiraBahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Sara AmaralDepartment of Anesthesiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, 27701, USA. saraamaral@icloud.com.ORCID 0000-0001-5399-668X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOpioid anesthesia is commonly employed in minimally invasive surgeries but is associated with adverse effects, including postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Opioid-free anesthesia aims to mitigate these issues. We conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) comparing opioid and opioid-free anesthesia in minimally invasive abdominal surgeries.

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing these approaches. Our primary outcomes were adverse effects (PONV, bradycardia), while secondary outcomes were pain, opioid consumption, and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay (LOS). We performed a TSA to investigate the conclusiveness of the results.

resultsWe included 26 RCTs encompassing 2,025 patients, with 1,009 (49%) in the opioid-free anesthesia group. Opioid-free anesthesia reduced PONV significantly (risk ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.74; P < 0.001), but we found no significant differences in bradycardia rates. We found nonclinically relevant higher pain scores for opioid anesthesia (mean difference [MD], -0.9; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.2; P = 0.01) and opioid consumption at 2 hr post surgery (MD, -5.4 mg oral morphine equivalents; 95% CI, -9.1 to -1.8; P = 0.004). We also noted a reduced time to first analgesia (MD, 88 min; 95% CI, 18 to 159; P = 0.01). We found no differences in PACU LOS. The TSA confirmed the sample size's adequacy in showing PONV reduction with opioid-free anesthesia.

conclusionOpioid-free anesthesia showed a significant reduction in PONV and a decrease in opioid consumption during the first 2 hr postoperatively, suggesting it can be an alternative to opioid anesthesia in minimally invasive abdominal surgeries. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ( CRD42023492385 ); first submitted 18 December 2023.

Indexed as

AbdomenAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthesiaLength of StayMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPostoperative Nausea and VomitingPostoperative PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHumansAnalgesics, Opioidabdominal surgeryanalgesiaminimally invasive abdominal surgeryopioid-freeopioidsopioid-sparing

Identifiers

PMID39500840

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.