SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Anesthesia Recovery Period”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Opioid-sparing anesthesia based on opioid-free principles for early recovery after total knee arthroplasty: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether an opioid-sparing anesthesia strategy (OSA), based on opioid-free anesthesia (OFA), improves early postoperative recovery quality and optimizes functional outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), compared with conventional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA). DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial with blinding of patients, surgeons, and outcome assessors. SETTING: Single center, July 2025 to February 2026. PATIENTS: 98 adult patients scheduled for elective unilateral TKA. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to the OSA or OBA group. The OSA regimen used esketamine and dexmedetomidine as the primary analgesic backbone, whereas the OBA regimen was opioid-based. Both groups received preoperative femoral nerve block and were administered oxycodone at skin incision and closure. Postoperatively, both groups received the same multimodal analgesia and patient-controlled analgesia. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the 24-h postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score. Secondary outcomes included 48-h QoR-15; Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and EQ-5D-3L at 1 and 3 months; high pain at 1 month and chronic postsurgical pain at 3 months. Exploratory outcomes included postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP), and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), among others. RESULTS: At 24 h postoperatively, QoR-15 was higher in the OSA group than in the OBA group (118.4 ± 11.5 vs 113.3 ± 12.2; adjusted difference 5.12, 95% CI 0.51-9.74; P = 0.029), and this advantage persisted at 48 h (adjusted difference 5.54, 95% CI 1.57-9.52; P = 0.007). The OSA group had a lower incidence of PONV (P = 0.025) and lower postoperative CRP levels (P = 0.001). At 1 month, OKS was higher in the OSA group (adjusted difference 2.31, 95% CI 0.34-4.27; P = 0.022), with no significant differences in other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: In TKA, this OFA-based OSA strategy improved early postoperative QoR-15 scores. However, the QoR-15 difference did not reach the minimal clinically important difference, so its clinical relevance remains uncertain.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Efficacy of esketamine in reducing nausea and vomiting after anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are significant perioperative challenges. This study evaluated the efficacy of perioperative esketamine in preventing PONV. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to August 2025 for randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of perioperative esketamine on PONV. The primary outcome was PONV incidence. Secondary outcomes included time to first flatus, postoperative pain degree, anxiety scores, agitation, anesthesia recovery time, and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay duration. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 and STATA 15.0 software. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to assess result stability and explore potential sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Thirty-eight randomized trials (3,425 patients) were included. Esketamine reduced the risk of nausea (RR=0.69, 95% CI: 0.53-0.90) and vomiting (RR=0.75, 95% CI: 0.57-0.98), shortened time to first flatus (SMD=-0.81, 95% CI: -1.48 to -0.15), and decreased rescue analgesic needs within 2 days (SMD=0.32, 95% CI: 0.2-0.5). However, it prolonged anesthesia recovery time (SMD=0.97, 95% CI: 0.28-1.67) and PACU stay (SMD=0.76, 95% CI: 0.27-1.26). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative esketamine may reduce PONV and aid gastrointestinal recovery, but its potential to delay anesthesia recovery and PACU discharge requires consideration. Further studies are needed to clarify its risk-benefit profile. DATE OF FIRST SUBMISSION TO PROSPERO: 10 March 2024. DATE OF THE START OF STUDY SCREENING AGAINST ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: 21 March 2024.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Esketamine vs. sufentanil for quality of recovery after outpatient gynecological surgery: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative administration of esketamine has been reported to improve early quality of recovery (QoR). However, data on its effects in outpatient surgery are limited. This study aimed to assess the impact of esketamine on QoR in patients undergoing outpatient gynecological procedures. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomized clinical trial, patients aged 18-65 years scheduled for outpatient gynecological surgery under sedation were allocated to receive esketamine (0.2 mg/kg) or sufentanil (0.1 μg/kg) combined with propofol (1.5-3 mg/kg). The primary outcome was quality of recovery on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes included quality of recovery on POD2, sedation success rate, length of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, injection pain, postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, patient and clinician satisfaction, sleep quality, and anxiety and depression. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were randomized, with 63 assigned to the esketamine group and 63 to the sufentanil group. Of these, 125 patients were included in the final analysis (62 in the esketamine group and 63 in the sufentanil group), as one patient lacked follow-up data. The mean (SD) QoR-15 score on POD1 was 137.9 (14.5) in the esketamine group and 137.8 (10.7) in the sufentanil group, with no significant difference between groups (absolute difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -4.2 to 4.6; p = 0.93). For secondary outcomes, the esketamine group had a longer PACU stay (median, 28.0 vs. 23.0 min; p < 0.001), a lower incidence of severe injection pain (22.6% vs. 50.8%; p = 0.002), a higher proportion of patients with pain scores ≥ 4 at 30 min postoperatively (30.6% vs. 6.3%; p = 0.001), and higher fatigue scores (median, 3.0 vs. 2.0; p = 0.01). Other secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing sedation for outpatient gynecological procedures, esketamine did not significantly improve quality of recovery on POD1 compared to sufentanil. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2500098466.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring Using Propofol-Fentanyl Versus Desflurane-Dexmedetomidine Anesthesia During Spinal Cord Tumor Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing resection of spinal cord tumours require intraoperative neuromonitoring. Transcranial electrical stimulation is used to record myogenic responses during surgery. This study aimed to compare the effect of 2 anaesthetic regimens, propofol/fentanyl versus desflurane/dexmedetomidine, on the ability to record MEPs with an amplitude of 50 µV or greater. Our secondary outcome compared intraoperative haemodynamics, recovery profile, and postoperative analgesia between the groups. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blinded, open-label, single-centre, randomized controlled trial of 50 adult patients undergoing spinal cord tumour resection with TcmMEP monitoring. Patients were randomized to 2 groups: Group P (n=25) received intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and fentanyl; group D (n=25) received desflurane and dexmedetomidine. RESULTS: We recorded TcmMEP's in 80% of group P and 76% group D (95% CI: -23% to 31%, P =1.00). The time in minutes for spontaneous breathing (21.04±11.31 vs. 8.00±3.42 [8.29-,17.79, P =0.01]), extubation (31.56±17.56 vs. 10.84±3.99 [13.48-27.96; P =0.01]), emergence (33.68±18.11 vs. 10.92±4.01 [15.30-30.22, P =0.001]), discharge readiness (45.00±25.24 vs. 15.56±6.08 [19.00-39.88; P =0.001]) and requirement of first analgesia (136.6±108.04 vs. 230.8±81.33) (-148.58 to -39.82; P =0.01) was lower in group D compared with group P. Postoperative analgesia assessed using the Visual Analogue Score was lower in group D compared with group P at 12 and 24 hours. (1.68±1.18 vs. 0.64±1.31 [0.33-1.74 P =0.001]) :1.4±0.95 vs. 0.36± 0.70 (0.56-1.51; P =0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found similar rates of successful TcMEP monitoring using desflurane-dexmedetomidine and propofol-fentanyl. Patients who received desflurane-dexmedetomidine had reduced emergence time, discharge readiness, and lower pain scores in the postoperative period.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Surgery/anesthesia may cause monocytes to promote tumor development.

BACKGROUND: The immune system of patients undergoing major surgery usually has obvious immune responses during the perioperative period, and the patient's immune status would affect the patient's prognosis. In this study single-cell sequencing technology was used to investigate the effect of surgery/anesthesia on peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) in depth during the perioperative period. METHODS: We performed an in-depth analysis of our previously published data, which included a total of 4 patients were recruited in this study. Their peripheral blood samples were collected pre operation, 0, 24, and 48 h post operation, and then PBMCs were extracted, followed by single cell sequencing. The results of sequencing were analyzed with R packages seurat and scSTAR. Finally, RT-PCR technology was used to verify the expression of key genes in monocyte. RESULTS: The ratio of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and Tregs showed little change, and the function of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells recovered soon. The function of Treg had not been restored 48 h post operation. Non-classical monocyte was impressed after surgery and showed no recovery trend within 48 h. Similar to scRNA-seq, the expression levels of MDM2 and SESN1 in patients with tumor increased significantly after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery/anesthesia had little effect on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and continued to affect the functional changes of Treg. It had more impact on monocytes, which may cause them to promote tumor development to a certain extent.

Humans↗