SynthesisSystematic reviews2025
Comparison of efficacy and safety profiles of perioperative sufentanil and remifentanil: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSufentanil 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.
methodsThis 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.
resultsA 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.
conclusionsCompared 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.
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.