Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2024
Intrathecal Morphine and Ropivacaine for Quality of Recovery After Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07232108 (Effects of Intrathecal Morphine Compared With Trocar-Site Infiltration and Intraperitoneal Bupivacaine on Postoperative Quality of Recovery and Inflammatory Markers After Laparoscopic Hysterectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Effects of Intrathecal Morphine Compared With Trocar-Site Infiltration and Intraperitoneal Bupivacaine on Postoperative Quality of Recovery and Inflammatory Markers After Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Controlled Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Intrathecal morphine is increasingly used for pain management in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. While ropivacaine shows advantages of reduced cardiotoxicity and faster motor recovery compared to bupivacaine, the impact of intrathecal morphine-ropivacaine combination on postoperative recovery quality remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate this combination's effect on recovery outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Patients and Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 78 patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery received either preservative-free intrathecal morphine 250 μg with ropivacaine 15 mg (Intrathecal group) or a sham subcutaneous saline injection (Control group). The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, opioid consumption, and adverse effects. Results: The intrathecal group showed significantly higher QoR-15 scores 24 hours postoperatively compared to the control group (median [IQR]: 121 [109-128] vs 111 [102-116], p < 0.001), with improvements in pain management (p < 0.001), physical comfort (p = 0.001), and physical independence (p = 0.002). The intrathecal group had lower pain scores at rest (area under the curve 0-48 h: 66 [59-90] vs 107 [89-126], p < 0.001) and during coughing (152 [137-172] vs 191 [166-213], p < 0.001), particularly from 0.5 to 24 hours. They also required less postoperative morphine (0-48 h: 10 [6-20] vs 26 [22-36] mg, p < 0.001). While hypotension (43.6% vs 17.9%, p = 0.014) and pruritus (35.9% vs 2.6%, p < 0.001) were more frequent in the intrathecal group, but no respiratory depression occurred in either group. Conclusion: Intrathecal morphine-ropivacaine administration improves 24-hour postoperative recovery quality and provides superior pain relief after laparoscopic colorectal surgery, despite increased but manageable side effects. Further research should focus on dose optimization and comparative studies of different intrathecal local anesthetic combinations. Trial Registration: The Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2100052337.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.