Objective To systematically evaluate effectiveness, dosage and adverse reaction of sufentanil versus fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), so as to provide evidence for rational drug use in clinic. Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library, the special trials registered in the Cochrane anesthesia group, MEDLINE, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data were searched by the end of 2012, and the relevant periodicals were also manually searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on sufentanil versus fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia. According to the Cochrane Handbook 5.0, literature was screened, data were extracted, and quality of the included studies was critically assessed. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. Results A total of 25 RCTs involving 1 944 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) as for visual analog scale (VAS), compared with the fentanyl group, the postoperative VAS at 2-hour, 4-hour, 8-hour, 12-hour, 24-hour and 48-hour was decreased in the sufentanil group; b) as for sedation scale, the fentanyl group, the postoperative sedation at 12-hour and 24-hour was lower in the sufentanil group when adopting 0 to 3 points scoring method, but there were no significant differences at other time points; c) as for drug dosage, compared with the fentanyl group, the postoperative drug consumption at 24-hour and 48-hour was less in the sufentanil group; d) as for adverse reaction, the incidence of postoperative nausea, vomiting, dizziness and somnolence in the sufentanil group was lower than those in the fentanyl group. But there was no significant difference in other adverse reactions such as skin itching, limbs numbness and motor disturbance between the two groups; and e) as for the demands of additional analgesic drugs, compared with the fentanyl group, the incidence of demanding additional analgesic drugs was lower in the sufentanil group. Conclusion Compared with fentanyl, sufentanil has better effects of analgesia and sedation for PCEA; Its dosage and incidence of adverse reactions are lower, so sufentanil is safer in clinic.
Objective To evaluate the sedative effects of fentanyl on ventilated patients in intensive care unit (ICU ).Methods Thirty orotracheal intubated and mechanical ventilated medical patients in ICU were randomly divided into two groups，ie.Midazolam group (group M) and midazolam combined with fentanyl group with a proportion of 100∶1 (group M+F) The sedatives were continuously intravenously infused to achieve a target motor activity assessment scale (MAAS) of 3 and ventilator synchrony score of adaptation to the intensive care environment (ATICE) ≥3 after loading dose of midazolam.The sedation level was evaluated and the infusion rate was adjusted to maintain the target sedation goal every 2 h and the hemodynamic，respiratory and sedative parameters were recorded simultaneously.The oxygenation index were measured at 12 and 24 h.The infusion were ceased after 24 h,then the sedative degree was assessed every 30 min until MAAS ≥3 and the recover time were recorded.Results There were no significant differences in blood pressure，oxygenation index and adjustive frequency of drugs between the two groups (all Pgt;0.05).The heart rate，respiratory rate and airway pressure in group M+F decreased significantly than those in Group M (Plt;0.05).The amount of midazolam used and cost of sedatives were lower than those in group M (Plt;0.05).Satisfactory degree of sedation or ventilator synchrony and awakeness score of ATICE in group M+F were higher than those in group M.The recover time was shorter in groupM+F (Plt;0.05).Conclusion In medical ventilated patients, fentanyl improves the sedative effect of midazolam and reduces the dose of midazolam,hence,reduce the total cost of sedatives.
Objective To compare the analgesic effects of fentanyl, tramadol and flurbiprofen axetil during vitrectomy under local anesthesia. Methods One hundred and twenty patients who underwent vitrectomy were randomly divided into four groups, 30 patients in each group. Control group (Group C): normal saline were given; Fentanyl group （group F): fentanyl 1 mu;g/kg; Tramadol group （group T): tramadol 1 mg/kg; Flurbiprofen group （group K): flurbiprofen axetil 1 mg/kg. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), oxygen saturation (SpO2), sedation classification (OAA / S) and pain score (NRS) were recorded prior to drug administration (T0) and the beginning of surgery (T1), 5 min (T2), 15 min(T3), 30 min (T4) and the end of surgery (T5) . The incidence of analgesic remedy and adverse reactions were also recorded after surgery. Results In group F, MAP at T1 and T2 were significantly lower than T0 and that of the other three groups at the same time point (F=5.367,5.967;P＜0.05). MAP at each time point of the other three groups had no significant changes (P＞0.05). In Group C, HR decreased significantly at T3and T4compared to T0 (F=7.900, 6.767;P＜0.05). In Group F, HR decreased significantly at T2 compared to T0 (F=3.117，P＜0.05). HR at each time point of group T and group K had no significant changes (P＞0.05). In group F, SpO2at T1 was significantly lower than T0 and that of the other three groups at the same time point (F=7.352, P＜0.05). SpO2of group F, group T and group K had no significant changes within groups (P＞0.05). In Group F, the median of OAA / S classification at T1 were grade four, which were lower than that at T0 and that of the other three groups at the same time point (chi;2=12.935, P＜0.05). There was no significant changes of the median of OAA / S classification at each time point in the other three groups (P＞0.05). In group C, the median of NRS score was three at T1 and was two at T2 respectively, which were higher than that at T0 and that of Group F and group T at the same time point (chi;2=13.748,11.616; P＜0.05). There were no significant changes of the median of NRS score in group F, group T and group K within groups (P＞0.05). Analgesic remedy percentages in group C, group F, group T and group K were 16.7%, 3.3%, 3.3%, 6.7%, respectively. The incidence of adverse reactions in group C, group F, group T and group K were 30.0%、23.3%、3.3%、16.7%, respectively.Conclusion Tramadol had efficient analgesic effects and low rate of adverse reactions during vitrectomy under local anesthesia.
ObjectiveTo explore the efficacy and safety of different sedative and analgesic methods in emergent endotracheal intubations in RICU. Methods110 cases of tracheal intubation in critically ill patients were divided into 5 groups randomly: ① control group(given no sedative or analgesic drug before intubation); ② fentanyl group(given intravenous fentanyl 2 μg/kg before intubation,followed by fentanyl 2 μg·kg-1·h-1 maintenance); ③ dexmedetomidine hydrochloride+fentanyl group(given dexmedetomidine hydrochloride 1 μg/kg+fentanyl 2 μg/kg before intubation,followed by dexmedetomidine hydrochloride 0.5 μg·kg-1·h-1+fentanyl 2 μg·kg-1·h-1 maintenance); ④ midazolam+fentanyl group(given midazolam 0.05 mg/kg+fentanyl 2 μg/kg before intubation,followed by midazolam 0.05 mg·kg-1·h-1+fentanyl 2 μg·kg-1·h-1 maintenance); ⑤ Propofol+fentanyl group(given propofol 1 mg/kg+fentanyl 2 μg/kg before intubation,followed by propofol 0.4 mg·kg-1·h-1+fentanyl 2 μg·kg-1·h-1 maintenance).The mean arterial pressure(MAP),heart rate(HR),respiratory frequency(RR),PaO2/FiO2,Riker sedation score and agitation were monitored before,during and after intubations.The one-time success rate of intubation and severe arrhythmia (sinus bradycardia,frequent ventricular premature,ventricular fibrillation,and cardiac arrest) incidence rate were recorded. ResultsThe one-time success rates of intubations of the propofol+fentanyl group (95.4%) and the midazolam+fentanyl group (90.9%) were higher than that in the dexmedetomidine hydrochloride+fentanyl group (86.4%,P<0.05),while one-time intubation success rate of three groups were higher than that of the fentanyl group (45.4%) and the control group (31.8%,P<0.05).5 minutes after intubation,the PaO2/FiO2 index of 5 groups of patients were higher than those before intubation,but the PaO2/FiO2 index of the control group and the fentanyl group were lower than those in the other three groups(P<0.05).The occurrence of serious arrhythmia rate in the dexmedetomidine hydrochloride+fentanyl group (0%),the midazolam+fentanyl group (9%) and the propofol+fentanyl group (9%) were lower than that in the control group (13.6%) and the fentanyl group (18.2%).The MAP during intubation and 2 minutes after intubation of the propofol+fentanyl group and the midazolam+fentanyl group were lower than that in the other three groups(P<0.05).The proportion of patients with Riker sedation and agitation score≤4 at intubation in the dexmedetomidine hydrochloride+fentanyl group (68.2%) was lower than that in the propofol+fentanyl group(90.9%) and the midazolam+fentanyl group (86.4%,P<0.05),but higher than those in the fentanyl group(22.7%)and the control group(18.2%,P<0.05). ConclusionPropofol,midazolam or dexmedetomidine hydrochloride with fentanyl are all effective and safe methods of sedation and analgesia in emergent endotracheal intubation in RICU.Dexmedetomidine hydrochloride with fentanyl is an ideal sedative relatively with less influence on cardiovascular system and less myocardial oxygen consumption.
ObjectiveTo explore sedation effect of dexmedetomidine alone and its effects on respiration and circulation of complications in transtracheal endoscopic interventional therapy. MethodsFrom April 2012 to May 2014, 60 adult patients who plan to undergo transtracheal endoscopic interventional therapy were recruited in the study. The patients were divided into a midazolam combined with fenanyl citrate intravenous injection group (MF group), and a dexmedetomidine target controlled infusion group (Y group) using the method of random number table, with 30 cases in each group. All patients were given 2% lidocaine 15 mL by ultrasonic atomizing inhalation for local surface anaesthesia preoperatively, and then the patients in MF group received midazolam and fentanyl citrate by slow intravenous injection, the patients in Y group received dexmedetomidine 0.5 g intravenous injection and persistant infusion of dexmedetomidinein dosage of 0.2 μg/h. The basic Ramsay sedation score (T0) was recorded, then the Ramsay sedation scoring was conducted when the bronchoscope entering into the pharyngeal cavity (T1), into the glottis (T2), and into the bronchial (T3), respectively. ResultsThere were no significant differences in restlessness, hypotension, hypertension, or tachycardia incidence rate between two groups (P>0.05). The differences in Ramsay score between two groups was not significant at T0 or T1 time point (P>0.05), but was significant at T2 and T3 time point (P<0.05). Compared with MF group, the incidence of respiratory depression and hypoxemia was significantly lower, and the recovery time was significantly shorter in Y group (P<0.05). All patients in Y group woke up immediately by simple call. While in MF group, 23 patients needed intravenous flumazenil to promote awakening. ConclusionDexmedetomidine alone can provide effective sedation in transtracheal endoscopic interventional therapy with good effect, high safety, and more convenient awakening.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dezocine versus fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA). MethodsWe electronically searched the specialized trials registered in The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2013), the Cochrane anesthesia group, MEDLINE, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data from inception to February, 2013. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on dezocine versus Fentanyl for postoperative PCIA were included. RevMan 5.0 software was used for meta-analysis after critically literature screening, data extracting and assessing of methodological quality independently by two reviewers. ResultsA total of 15 RCTs involving 1 116 patients were finally included. The results of meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in postoperative analgesia and sedation at the hour-points of 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h after surgery. As for safety, the incidences of postoperative nausea, vomiting, skin pruritus, respiratory depression and uroschesis in the dezocine group were lower than those in the fentanyl group. ConclusionCompared with fentanyl, dezocine has the same effects of analgesia and sedation for PCIA; its incidence of adverse reactions is lower, so dezocine is safer in clinic.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of sufentanil versus fentanyl used in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after cesarean section.MethodsAn online search of computerized searches of the database of MEDLINE (OVID), Web of Science, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMbase, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP and SinoMed were conducted. Randomized controlled trials published since the inceptions of these databases until April 1st 2018, involving the comparison of sufentanil versus fentanyl for PCIA after cesarean section were included. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was conducted using the RevMan 5.1 software.ResultsA total of 19 studies were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with the fentanyl group, the sufentanil group had statistically significant lower VAS scores at 4-hour (MD=–0.99, 95%CI –1.03 to –0.95, P<0.001), 8-hour (MD=–0.30, 95%CI –0.40 to –0.21, P<0.001), 12-hour (MD=–0.54, 95%CI –0.62 to –0.46, P<0.001) and 24-hour (MD=–0.35, 95%CI –0.41 to –0.28, P<0.001); statistically significant higher Ramsay scores at 4-hour (MD=0.72, 95%CI 0.66 to 0.78, P<0.001), 8-hour (MD=0.93, 95%CI 0.86 to 1.00, P<0.001), 12-hour (MD=0.98, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.05, P<0.001), 24-hour (MD=0.07, 95%CI 0.03 to 0.11, P=0.000 5), 48-hour (MD=0.05, 95%CI 0.03 to 0.08, P<0.000 1). As for the adverse reactions, sufentanil group had lower risks of having nausea and vomiting (RR=0.25, 95%CI 0.19 to 0.31, P<0.001), pruritus (RR=0.41, 95%CI 0.30 to 0.57, P<0.001), dizziness (RR=0.27, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.44, P<0.001) and urinary retention (RR=0.35, 95%CI (0.15, 0.82), P=0.02).ConclusionsThe current evidence shows that, sufentanil has better analgesia and sedative effects, and less risks of adverse reactions for safer clinical use.