Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2025
Comparison of Oliceridine and Morphine in Postoperative Analgesia in Laparoscopic Total Hysterectomy, a Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal Conscious Analgesia with Oliceridine and Alfentanil Plus Local Anesthesia in Revisional Upper Eyelid Blepharoplasty: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Trial
- Effect of Oliceridine on the Acute Postoperative Pain Management After Elective Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Comparison of Oliceridine and Hydromorphone for Postoperative Analgesia in Adults Undergoing Lower Limb Fracture Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Comparison of Postoperative Analgesic Efficacy of Oliceridine and Sufentanil in Total Laparoscopy Hysterectomy, a Clinical Double-Blind Controlled Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and safety of oliceridine in daytime hysteroscopic polypectomy: a randomized, double-blind, single-center controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Compare the analgesic efficacy and safety profiles of oliceridine and morphine in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after laparoscopic total hysterectomy. Materials and Methods: This prospective, double-blind trial randomly allocated 60 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic total hysterectomy in a 1:1 ratio to receive either oliceridine (group O) or morphine (group M) via PCIA. The primary endpoint was cough numerical rating scale (NRS) scores 6 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included cough/resting NRS scores at 0.5, 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h (6 h cough NRS score excluded); 24-hour postoperative recovery quality using 15-item Quality of Recovery (QoR-15) scale. Exploratory indicators including hemodynamic parameters and peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO Results: Group O demonstrated superior early analgesia with lower resting NRS (1.0 [1.0,1.0] vs 1.5 [1.0,2.0]; Conclusion: Oliceridine demonstrates analgesic efficacy comparable to morphine after laparoscopic total hysterectomy but exhibits superior safety by significantly reducing opioid-related adverse events and potentially accelerating postoperative recovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.