Suppr超能文献

围手术期舒芬太尼与瑞芬太尼有效性和安全性的比较:一项采用序贯分析的系统评价和荟萃分析

Comparison of efficacy and safety profiles of perioperative sufentanil and remifentanil: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

作者信息

Kim Hyo Jin, Choi Geun Joo, Kang Hyun

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University Gwangmyeong Hospital, 110 Deokan-Ro, Gwangmyeong-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 14353, Republic of Korea.

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, 84 Heukseok-Ro, Dongjak-Gu, Seoul, 06911, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Syst Rev. 2025 Sep 24;14(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s13643-025-02933-w.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Sufentanil and remifentanil are commonly used during general anesthesia. This systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to comprehensively evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety profiles of perioperative sufentanil and remifentanil administration in patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia.

METHODS

This study was registered in INPLASY (INPLASY202270070). A comprehensive search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify all RCTs comparing the efficacy of the intraoperative use of sufentanil to that of remifentanil. The primary outcome were the postoperative pain scores measured using visual analogue scale (VAS) or numerical rating scales (NRS). The secondary outcomes were the postoperative analgesic use, time to first analgesic need, intraoperative hemodynamic profiles, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), incidence of respiratory depression, and recovery characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies were included in the final analysis. Postoperative pain score was significantly higher in remifentanil group than that in sufentanil group, with a small effect size (standardized mean difference [SMD] =  - 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.24 to 0.70). Postoperative analgesic amount used was lower in sufentanil group than that in remifentanil group, with a medium effect size (SMD = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.99). In terms of hemodynamic profiles, intraoperative systolic blood pressure (mean difference [MD] =  - 6.30; 95% CI =  - 10.76 to - 1.85), mean arterial pressure (MD =  - 6.38; 95% CI =  - 10.25 to - 2.51), and heart rate (MD =  - 4.16; 95% CI =  - 6.65 to - 1.68) were lower in remifentanil group than in sufentanil group. Incidence of postoperative nausea (relative risk = 1.39; 95% CI = 1.13 to 1.71) was higher in remifentanil group than in sufentanil group. The remifentanil group showed a faster recovery profile than the sufentanil group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with remifentanil, sufentanil demonstrated superior efficacy in postoperative pain management and superior safety profiles with respect to postoperative nausea and hemodynamic stability; however, remifentanil showed a faster recovery profile.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (INPLASY), NPLASY202270070.

摘要

背景

舒芬太尼和瑞芬太尼常用于全身麻醉期间。本项对随机对照试验(RCT)进行系统评价和Meta分析并采用试验序贯分析,旨在全面评估和比较全身麻醉下接受手术患者围手术期使用舒芬太尼和瑞芬太尼的疗效和安全性。

方法

本研究已在INPLASY(INPLASY202270070)注册。使用MEDLINE、EMBASE、CENTRAL、科学引文索引和谷歌学术进行全面检索,以识别所有比较术中使用舒芬太尼与瑞芬太尼疗效的随机对照试验。主要结局是使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)或数字评定量表(NRS)测量的术后疼痛评分。次要结局包括术后镇痛药物使用情况、首次需要镇痛的时间、术中血流动力学指标、术后恶心呕吐(PONV)、呼吸抑制发生率和恢复特征。

结果

最终分析共纳入31项研究。瑞芬太尼组术后疼痛评分显著高于舒芬太尼组,效应量较小(标准化均数差[SMD]= -0.47;95%置信区间[CI]=0.24至0.70)。舒芬太尼组术后镇痛药物使用量低于瑞芬太尼组,效应量中等(SMD=0.55;95%CI=0.12至0.99)。在血流动力学指标方面,瑞芬太尼组术中收缩压(均数差[MD]= -6.30;95%CI= -10.76至-1.85)、平均动脉压(MD= -6.38;95%CI= -10.25至-2.51)和心率(MD= -4.16;95%CI= -6.65至-1.68)均低于舒芬太尼组。瑞芬太尼组术后恶心发生率(相对危险度=1.39;95%CI=1.13至1.71)高于舒芬太尼组。瑞芬太尼组的恢复情况比舒芬太尼组更快。

结论

与瑞芬太尼相比,舒芬太尼在术后疼痛管理方面疗效更优,在术后恶心和血流动力学稳定性方面安全性更佳;然而,瑞芬太尼恢复更快。

系统评价注册

国际系统评价前瞻性注册库(INPLASY),NPLASY202270070。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验