ArticleJournal of pain research2025
Opioid-Free versus Opioid-Sparing Anesthesia for Postoperative Pain and Early Recovery After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular mechanism of allosteric modulation of opioid receptors.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Article
- Intraoperative haemodynamic responses to opioid-free anaesthesia versus anaesthesia with fentanyl for laparoscopic cholecystectomy-a prospective observational pilot study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Observational
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: Enhanced recovery after surgery emphasizes effective analgesia while minimal opioid use. Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA) have been shown to enhance recovery by reducing opioid-induced side effects. This study compared the efficacy of OFA and OSA in managing postoperative pain and recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Patients and Methods: A single-center, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 86 adults undergoing LC. Patients received either OSA (sufentanil/remifentanil) or OFA (no opioids). Both groups received propofol, esketamine, dexmedetomidine, and erector spinae plane block. The primary outcome was pain area under the curve (AUCVAS) within 36 hours postsurgery. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamics, recovery times and bowel function. Results: Eighty-one patients (41 and 40 in the OFA and OSA groups, respectively) completed the study. The AUCVAS scores were similar between the OFA (7.3 ± 1.4) and OSA (6.9 ± 1.3) groups (P = 0.201), the difference in AUCVAS between the two groups was 0.384 (95% CI: -0.296, 1.064), which was significantly below the preset noninferiority threshold of 1.0, demonstrating the noninferiority of OFA. While early pain scores within the first 12 hours postanesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge were slightly higher in the OFA group, but overall pain control was sufficient in both groups. The VAS scores from PACU discharge to 36 hours postoperatively, intraoperative hemodynamic variables, and the need for rescue analgesia were comparable. OFA patients experienced a faster bowel recovery (13.8 ± 2.4 vs 15.5 ± 2.3 hours, P = 0.002). Recovery times, postoperative QoR-40 scores, and patient satisfaction were similar between the groups. Conclusion: OFA is noninferior to OSA in pain management and hemodynamic stability, with faster bowel recovery after LC.
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.