-
Current Clinical Pharmacology 2019Opioid analgesics are commonly used along with propofol during general anesthesia. Due to the dearth of data on the quality of anesthesia achieved with this combination,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Comparison of Fentanyl, Remifentanil, Sufentanil and Alfentanil in Combination with Propofol for General Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
BACKGROUND
Opioid analgesics are commonly used along with propofol during general anesthesia. Due to the dearth of data on the quality of anesthesia achieved with this combination, the present meta-analysis was carried out.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched for appropriate studies using a suitable search strategy. Randomized clinical trials comparing the combination of remifentanil/sufentanil/alfentanil with propofol with fentanyl and propofol, were included. The outcome measures were as follows: total propofol dose to achieve the desired general anesthesia; time of onset and duration of general anesthesia; depth of general anesthesia; and recovery time (time for eye-opening and time taken for extubation). Risk of bias was assessed and Forest plots were generated for eligible outcomes. The weighted mean difference [95% confidence intervals] was used as the effect estimate.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included in the systematic review and 13 were included in the metaanalysis. Statistically significant differences were observed for remifentanil in comparison to fentanyl when combined with propofol: Propofol dose (in mg) -76.18 [-94.72, -57.64]; time of onset of anesthesia (min) -0.44 [-0.74, -0.15]; time taken for eye-opening (min) -3.95 [-4.8, -3.1]; and time for extubation (min) -3.53 [-4.37, -2.7]. No significant differences were observed for either sufentanil or alfentanil about the dose of propofol required and due to scanty data, pooling of the data could not be attempted for other outcome measures for either sufentanil or alfentanil.
CONCLUSION
To conclude, we found that remifentanil has a statistically significant anesthetic profile than fentanyl when combined with propofol. Scanty evidence for both alfentanil and sufentanil precludes any such confirmation.
Topics: Alfentanil; Anesthesia, General; Anesthesia, Intravenous; Anesthetics, Intravenous; Fentanyl; Humans; Propofol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remifentanil; Sufentanil
PubMed: 30868958
DOI: 10.2174/1567201816666190313160438 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2015Agitation is a common experience for people living with dementia, particularly as day-to-day function and cognition start to decline more. At the present time there are... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Agitation is a common experience for people living with dementia, particularly as day-to-day function and cognition start to decline more. At the present time there are limited pharmacological options for relieving agitation and little is known about the safety and efficacy of opioid drugs in this setting.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the clinical efficacy and safety of opioids for agitation in people with dementia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialized Register, on 13 June 2014 using the terms: narcotic OR opioid OR opium OR morphine OR buprenorphine OR codeine OR dextromoramide OR diphenoxylate OR dipipanone OR dextropropoxyphene OR propoxyphene OR diamorphine OR dihydrocodeine OR alfentanil OR fentanyl OR remifentanil OR meptazinol OR methadone OR nalbuphine OR oxycodone OR papaveretum OR pentazocine OR meperidine OR pethidine OR phenazocine OR hydrocodone OR hydromorphone OR levorphanol OR oxymorphone OR butorphanol OR dezocine OR sufentanil OR ketobemidone.ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of a number of major healthcare databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE and PscyINFO, as well as numerous trial registries and grey literature sources.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised, controlled trials of opioids compared to placebo for agitation in people with dementia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed the studies identified by the search against the inclusion criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
There are currently no completed randomised, placebo controlled trials of opioids for agitation in dementia. There are two potentially relevant trials still in progress.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found insufficient evidence to establish the clinical efficacy and safety of opioids for agitation in people with dementia. There remains a lack of data to determine if or when opioids either relieve or exacerbate agitation. More evidence is needed to guide the effective, appropriate and safe use of opioids in dementia.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Dementia; Humans; Psychomotor Agitation
PubMed: 25972091
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009705.pub2 -
Palliative Medicine Jul 2011Opioid use in patients with renal impairment can lead to increased adverse effects. Opioids differ in their effect in renal impairment in both efficacy and tolerability.... (Review)
Review
A systematic review of the use of opioid medication for those with moderate to severe cancer pain and renal impairment: a European Palliative Care Research Collaborative opioid guidelines project.
BACKGROUND
Opioid use in patients with renal impairment can lead to increased adverse effects. Opioids differ in their effect in renal impairment in both efficacy and tolerability. This systematic literature review forms the basis of guidelines for opioid use in renal impairment and cancer pain as part of the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative's opioid guidelines project.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to identify and assess the quality of evidence for the safe and effective use of opioids for the relief of cancer pain in patients with renal impairment and to produce guidelines.
SEARCH STRATEGY
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MedLine, EMBASE and CINAHL were systematically searched in addition to hand searching of relevant journals.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies were included if they reported a clinical outcome relevant to the use of selected opioids in cancer-related pain and renal impairment. The selected opioids were morphine, diamorphine, codeine, dextropropoxyphene, dihydrocodeine, oxycodone, hydromorphone, buprenorphine, tramadol, alfentanil, fentanyl, sufentanil, remifentanil, pethidine and methadone. No direct comparator was required for inclusion. Studies assessing the long-term efficacy of opioids during dialysis were excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
This is a narrative systematic review and no meta-analysis was performed. The Grading of RECOMMENDATIONS Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the quality of the studies and to formulate guidelines.
MAIN RESULTS
Fifteen original articles were identified. Eight prospective and seven retrospective clinical studies were identified but no randomized controlled trials. No results were found for diamorphine, codeine, dihydrocodeine, buprenorphine, tramadol, dextropropoxyphene, methadone or remifentanil.
CONCLUSIONS
All of the studies identified have a significant risk of bias inherent in the study methodology and there is additional significant risk of publication bias. Overall evidence is of very low quality. The direct clinical evidence in cancer-related pain and renal impairment is insufficient to allow formulation of guidelines but is suggestive of significant differences in risk between opioids.
RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS regarding opioid use in renal impairment and cancer pain are made on the basis of pharmacokinetic data, extrapolation from non-cancer pain studies and from clinical experience. The risk of opioid use in renal impairment is stratified according to the activity of opioid metabolites, potential for accumulation and reports of successful or harmful use. Fentanyl, alfentanil and methadone are identified, with caveats, as the least likely to cause harm when used appropriately. Morphine may be associated with toxicity in patients with renal impairment. Unwanted side effects with morphine may be satisfactorily dealt with by either increasing the dosing interval or reducing the 24 hour dose or by switching to an alternative opioid.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Clinical Trials as Topic; Europe; Humans; Neoplasms; Pain; Pain Measurement; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Renal Insufficiency; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 21708859
DOI: 10.1177/0269216311406313 -
Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) Aug 2022Intraocular pressure (IOP) is crucial to the well-being of eyes. During anesthesia, the administration of succinylcholine and endotracheal intubation are associated with... (Review)
Review
Intraocular pressure (IOP) is crucial to the well-being of eyes. During anesthesia, the administration of succinylcholine and endotracheal intubation are associated with an increase in IOP, which may be attenuated by short-acting opioids. However, the drug of choice among the commonly used short-acting opioids is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of fentanyl, sufentanil, alfentanil, and remifentanil on IOP measured after the administration of succinylcholine and after endotracheal intubation in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Five databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared short-acting opioids and reported at least one of the clinical outcomes of interest were included. Nine RCTs with 357 patients were included. Remifentanil (1 μg kg) more effectively alleviated the increase in IOP than the placebo after the administration of succinylcholine [mean difference (MD) of IOP, -3.64; confidence interval (CI), -5.47 to -1.81 and after endotracheal intubation (MD, -9.71; CI, -11.91 to -7.51). Remifentanil (1 μg kg) ranked the best in terms of both attenuating the increase in IOP after the administration of succinylcholine [surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), 0.91; normalized entropy (NE), 0.47; and after endotracheal intubation (SUCRA, 0.89; NE, 0.54) among all of the treatments. Remifentanil (1 μg kg) should be considered the drug of choice in the circumstances where increased IOP is a great concern.
PubMed: 36015137
DOI: 10.3390/ph15080989 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2023Postictal agitation (PIA) after electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a serious clinical problem estimated to occur in 7-36% of patients and recur in 19-54% of patients....
BACKGROUND
Postictal agitation (PIA) after electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a serious clinical problem estimated to occur in 7-36% of patients and recur in 19-54% of patients. PIA has the potential to cause dangerous situations for the patient and staff members aside from the financial impact. To date, it is unclear which pharmacological interventions should be used in the management of PIA. This study aimed to systematically review the (preventative) pharmacological treatment options for PIA after ECT.
METHOD
A systematic search was done in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception until 10 November 2022. We included randomized trials with any pharmacological intervention or comparison and a predefined outcome measure on PIA. Studies that solely included patients with neurodegenerative disorders or stroke were excluded. Data quality was assessed with the RoB2 and GRADE. Meta-analysis was performed if possible. This study was registered on PROSPERO under CRD42021262323.
RESULTS
We screened 2,204 articles and included 14 studies. Dexmedetomidine was investigated in 10 studies. Alfentanil, lignocaine, esmolol, midazolam, propofol, ketamine, haloperidol, and diazepam were each studied in only one study. Meta-analysis revealed an OR of 0.45 (0.32-0.63), a moderate effect size, in favor of dexmedetomidine than placebo to prevent PIA with very low heterogeneity (I = 0%). The certainty of the evidence was moderate. The other interventions studied were all found to have low certainty of evidence.
CONCLUSION
For clinical practice, we believe that our results indicate that dexmedetomidine should be considered for the prevention of PIA in patients that have previously experienced PIA.
PubMed: 37151968
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1170931 -
Scandinavian Journal of Pain Oct 2011Introduction and aim Pain is a frequent symptom in emergency patients and opioids are commonly used to treat it at emergency departments and at pre-hospital settings....
Introduction and aim Pain is a frequent symptom in emergency patients and opioids are commonly used to treat it at emergency departments and at pre-hospital settings. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the efficacy and safety of parenteral opioids used for acute pain in emergency medicine. Method Qualitative review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on parenteral opioids for acute pain in adult emergency patients. Main outcome measures were: type and dose of the opioid, analgesic efficacy as compared to either placebo or another opioid and adverse effects. Results Twenty double-blind RCTs with results on 2322 patients were included. Seven studies were placebo controlled. Majority of studies were performed in the emergency department. Only five studies were in prehospital setting. Prehospital studies Four studies were on mainly trauma-related pain, one ischemic chest pain. One study compared two different doses of morphine in mainly trauma pain showing faster analgesia with the larger dose but no difference at 30 min postdrug. Three other studies on the same pain model showed equal analgesic effects with morphine and other opioids. Alfentanil was more effective than morphine in ischemic chest pain. Emergency department studies Pain models used were acute abdominal pain seven, renal colic four, mixed (mainly abdominal pain) three and trauma pain one study. Five studies compared morphine to placebo in acute abdominal pain and in all studies morphine was more effective than placebo. In four out of five studies on acute abdominal pain morphine did not change diagnostic accuracy, clinical or radiological findings. Most commonly used morphine dose in the emergency department was 0.1 mg/kg (five studies). Other opioids showed analgesic effect comparable to morphine. Adverse effects Recording and reporting of adverse effects was very variable. Vital signs were recorded in 15 of the 20 studies (including all prehospital studies). Incidence of adverse effects in the opioid groups was 5-38% of the patients in the prehospital setting and 4-46% of the patients in the emergency department. Nausea or vomiting was reported in 11-25% of the patients given opioids. Study drug was discontinued because of adverse effects five patients (one placebo, two sufentanil, two morphine). Eight studies commented on administration of naloxone for reversal of opioid effects. One patient out of 1266 was given naloxone for drowsiness. Ventilatory depression defined by variable criteria occurred in occurred in 7 out of 756 emergency department patients. Conclusion Evidence for selection of optimal opioid and dose is scarce. Opioids, especially morphine, are effective in relieving acute pain also in emergency medicine patients. Studies so far are small and reporting of adverse effects is very variable. Therefore the safety of different opioids and doses remains to be studied. Also the optimal titration regimens need to be evaluated in future studies. The prevention and treatment of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting is an important clinical consideration that requires further clinical and scientific attention in this patient group.
PubMed: 29913751
DOI: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2011.05.008 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Feb 2017Opioids are recommended for moderate to severe cancer pain; however, in patients with cancer, impaired renal function can affect opioid metabolism. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Opioids are recommended for moderate to severe cancer pain; however, in patients with cancer, impaired renal function can affect opioid metabolism. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current evidence for the use of opioids in cancer patients with renal impairment.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted and the following databases were searched: MEDLINE (1966 to 2015), EMBASE (1980 2015) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (up to 2015). Eligible studies met the following criteria: patients with cancer pain taking an opioid (defined as per the WHO ladder); >18 years; renal impairment (serum creatinine > normal range (study dependent), creatinine clearance (CrCl) or glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurements <90 ml/min, or as per the study definition); clinical outcome related to renal impairment. All eligible studies were appraised using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies (n = 2422) were eligible but heterogeneity meant meta-analysis was not possible. Morphine was examined in eight studies (n = 1418), oxycodone in two studies (n = 325), and fentanyl, alfentanil or sufentanil were discussed in six studies in total (n = 442). No recommendations could be formulated on the preferred opioid in patients with renal impairment.
CONCLUSION
There is lack of consensus within the existing literature on the relationship between morphine, creatinine levels and morphine-related side effects. Based on the current evidence, morphine should be used with caution; however, more evidence is needed. Fentanyl, alfentanil and sufentanil are recommended in patients with renal impairment based on pharmacokinetics and clinical experience. However, the present systematic review found very little clinical evidence for this. Overall, the quality of the existing evidence on opioid treatment in cancer patients with renal impairment is low. There remains a need for high-quality clinical studies examining opioids in patients with renal impairment.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Fentanyl; Humans; Neoplasms; Pain; Renal Insufficiency
PubMed: 27744535
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-016-3447-0 -
Epilepsy & Behavior : E&B May 2021Intraoperative electrocorticography (ECoG) is a useful technique to guide resections in epilepsy surgery and is mostly performed under general anesthesia. In this... (Review)
Review
Intraoperative electrocorticography (ECoG) is a useful technique to guide resections in epilepsy surgery and is mostly performed under general anesthesia. In this systematic literature review, we seek to investigate the effect of anesthetic agents on the quality and reliability of ECoG for localization of the epileptic focus. We conducted a systematic search using PubMed and EMBASE until January 2019, aiming to review the effects of anesthesia on ECoG yield. Fifty-eight studies were included from 1016 reviewed. There are favorable reports for dexmedetomidine and remifentanil during ECoG recording. There is inadequate, or sometimes conflicting, evidence to support using enflurane, isoflurane, sevoflurane, and propofol. There is evidence to avoid halothane, nitrous oxide, etomidate, ketamine, thiopental, methohexital, midazolam, fentanyl, and alfentanil due to undesired effects. Depth of anesthesia, intraoperative awareness, and surgical outcomes were not consistently evaluated. Available studies provide helpful information about the effect of anesthesia on ECoG to localize the epileptic focus. The proper use of anesthetic agents and careful dose titration, and effective communication between the neurophysiologist and anesthesiologist based on ECoG activity are essential in optimizing recordings. Anesthesia is a crucial variate to consider in the design of studies investigating ECoG and related biomarkers.
Topics: Electrocorticography; Electroencephalography; Epilepsy; Humans; Isoflurane; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 33819715
DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.107902 -
Brain Injury 2019Following traumatic brain injury (TBI), optimization of cerebral physiology is recommended to promote more favourable patient outcomes. Accompanying pain and agitation...
BACKGROUND
Following traumatic brain injury (TBI), optimization of cerebral physiology is recommended to promote more favourable patient outcomes. Accompanying pain and agitation are commonly treated with sedative and analgesic agents, such as opioids. However, the impact of opioids on certain aspects of cerebral physiology is not well established.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review of the evidence on the effect of opioids on cerebral physiology in TBI during acute care.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in five electronic databases for articles published in English up to November 2017. Studies were included if: (1) the study sample was human subjects with TBI; (2) the sample size was ≥3; (3) subjects were given an opioid during acute care; and (4) any measure of cerebral physiology was evaluated. Cerebral physiology measures were intracranial pressure (ICP), cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP). Subject and study characteristics, treatment protocol, and results were extracted from included studies. Randomized controlled trials were evaluated for methodological quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database tool. Levels of evidence were assigned using a modified Sackett scale.
RESULTS
In total, 22 studies met inclusion criteria, from which six different opioids were identified: morphine, fentanyl, sufentanil, remifentanil, alfentanil, and phenoperidine. The evidence for individual opioids demonstrated equally either: (1) no effect on ICP, CPP, or MAP; or (2) an increase in ICP with associated decreases in CPP and MAP. In general, opioids administered by infusion resulted in the former outcome, whereas those given in bolus form resulted in the latter. There were no significant differences when comparing different opioids, with the exception of one study that found fentanyl was associated with lower ICP and CPP than morphine and sufentanil. There were no consistent results when comparing opioids to other non-opioid medications.
CONCLUSION
Several studies have assessed the effect of opioids on cerebral physiology during the acute management of TBI, but there is considerable heterogeneity in terms of study methodology and findings. Opioids are beneficial in terms of analgesia and sedation, but bolus administration should be avoided to prevent additional or prolonged unfavourable alterations in cerebral physiology. Future studies should better elucidate the effects of different opioids as well as varying dosages in order to develop improved understanding as well as allow for tighter control of cerebral physiology.
ABBREVIATIONS
CPP: Cerebral Perfusion Pressure, GCS: Glasgow Coma Scale, ICP: Intracranial Pressure, MAP: Mean Arterial Pressure, PEDro: Physiotherapy Evidence Database, RCT: Randomized Controlled Trial, TBI: Traumatic Brain Injury.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Brain; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Cerebrovascular Circulation; Humans; Pain
PubMed: 30696281
DOI: 10.1080/02699052.2019.1574328 -
International Journal of Surgery... Mar 2018We performed a systematic review of various anaesthetic medications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and aimed to make a comprehensive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
We performed a systematic review of various anaesthetic medications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and aimed to make a comprehensive comparison based on a network meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched globally recognized electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Central and EMBASE, to retrieve relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of anaesthetic medications for ERCP. Network meta-analysis was conducted by evaluating the procedure time, adverse effects and drug requirements. The cumulative probability P value was utilized to rank the medications under examination.
RESULTS
Seventeen RCTs that examined 1877 patients were included in this research. Under good convergence and efficiency, data analysis was performed using a consistency model. For the comparison of procedure times, we found that a combination of dexmedetomidine and ketamine (P = 0.19) or propofol plus pethidine (P = 0.18) seemed to be the two best medications for reducing procedure time. Additionally, midazolam combined with dexmedetomidine plus pethidine seemed to be the safest application for ERCP (P = 0.36). Propofol plus alfentanil also exhibited a good safety value (P = 0.28). For evaluation of drug requirements, the whole network connection could not be established; thus, comparisons in two subgroups were conducted. The results showed that midazolam combined with dexmedetomidine plus pethidine (P = 0.41) and propofol plus refentanil (P = 0.94) were superior to others in decreasing drug requirements.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the objective results and our conclusions, we deemed that a combination of midazolam and dexmedetomidine was recommended, and propofol plus opioids also revealed great clinical value. However, we are still expecting more clinical research in the future.
Topics: Alfentanil; Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Dexmedetomidine; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Ketamine; Meperidine; Midazolam; Network Meta-Analysis; Operative Time; Propofol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29367034
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.01.018