ArticleDrug design, development and therapy2026
Oliceridine versus Sufentanil for Postoperative Intravenous Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Surgery in the AICU: A Double-Blind Non-Inferiority Trial.
Article in Drug design, development and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the efficacy of Oliceridine and sufentanil in postoperative pain management, adverse reactions, and their effects on extubation in patients undergoing abdominal surgery in an anaesthesia intensive care unit (AICU). Methods: This study was a randomised controlled non-inferiority clinical trial conducted between November 2024 and October 2025. It enrolled 184 patients transferred to the AICU following abdominal surgery, who were randomly assigned to Group S (100 μg sufentanil) or Group O (20 mg Oliceridine). In both groups, the analgesic pumps were diluted with normal saline to 100 mL, and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) was administered following transfer to the AICU; the primary outcome was the NRS score 6 hours after extubation, whilst secondary outcomes included resting NRS scores at various time points, the Ramsay sedation score, adverse reactions, the number of pump pushes, level of consciousness, time to extubation, and haemodynamic changes at the time of extubation. Results: The 6-hour NRS score in the Oliceridine group was non-inferior to that in the sufentanil group (1.63 ± 0.60 vs 1.75 ± 0.58; 95% CI upper limit 0.06, which is below the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 0.6). There were no statistically significant differences at any time point in resting NRS, Ramsay score, time to awakening/extubation, haemodynamics, or analgesic pump usage ( Conclusion: Among patients undergoing abdominal surgery at the AICU, the use of Oliceridine for postoperative analgesia was non-inferior to sufentanil and was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative nausea.
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.