ReviewInternational journal of physiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology2025
Analgesic effect of intravenous nefopam for postoperative pain in spine surgery: a meta-analysis of RCTs.
Review in International journal of physiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patient-controlled analgesia in transition: opioid-sparing strategies and the emergence of mechanism-based alternatives.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveFor the management of postoperative pain, opioids have typically been half their efficacy, but they are associated with notable side effects such as sedation, nausea, and respiratory depression. Nefopam is a non-opioid analgesic, within the benzoxazocine class, that has been suggested as an important adjunctive analgestic in multimodal analgesia (MMA). However, the extent to which analgesics outside of opioids are accepted as part of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs is controversial. The difficulty of predicting pain management outcome, considering the variability in postoperative pain, means that study of the analgesic effect of intravenous nefopam given different strategies, is essential in the use of nefopam for spinal surgery.
methodsWe completed a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar until July 20, 2025. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed intravenous nefopam for treating postoperative pain in patients who had spine surgery. The extracted data were pooled, and we performed a random-effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were planned to compare bolus use, infusion use, and bolus plus infusion use.
resultsSeven RCTs, involving a total of 471 patients, were included in the eligibility criteria. The overall pooled analysis found no differences in postoperative pain scores between the nefopam and control conditions. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was -0.28 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.74 to 0.18), which indicated no difference in efficacy. The sub-group analysis found that bolus administration had the greatest analgesic effect (SMD = -0.70) and infusion or bolus + infusions had little or no clinical benefit. The infusion sub-group had the greatest heterogeneity (I
conclusionThe use of intra-venous nefopam offers a small analgesic benefit in spine surgery, which is best seen when applied intermittently or as a bolus rather than as a continuous infusion. Though it is not particularly effective as a standalone agent, bolus does have potential as an adjunct and should be included as part of a more multimodal analgesia approach. Further high quality RCTs with larger sample sizes are warranted to better define the optimal application of nefopam and dosing in patients undergoing spinal surgery.
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.