Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2026
Tegileridine versus Sufentanil for Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia After Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Double-Blind Trial.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains one of the most common opioid-related adverse events after cesarean delivery despite multimodal analgesia. Tegileridine, a biased μ-opioid receptor agonist, may offer effective analgesia with fewer opioid-related adverse events. This randomized, double-blind trial compared tegileridine versus sufentanil for patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after cesarean delivery. Methods: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry number: ChiCTR2600123056. Ninety-four parturients scheduled for elective cesarean were randomized to receive PCIA with tegileridine 5 mg or sufentanil 100 μg. The primary outcome was the 48-hour incidence of PONV. Secondary outcomes included other opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs), pain scores, PCIA bolus counts, rescue analgesia, Quality of Recovery 15 (QoR-15) scores, ambulation time, and hospital stay. Results: Ninety-two participants completed the study. Compared with the sufentanil group, the tegileridine group had a lower incidence of PONV (6.5% vs 23.9%; RR = 0.27 (95% CI: 0.08-0.91); OR = 0.22 (95% CI: 0.06-0.86); ARD = -17.4% (95% CI: -31.6 to -3.1%); P=0.039) and dizziness (6.5% vs 26.1%; P=0.022). Postoperative pain scores, PCIA bolus counts, rescue analgesic requirements, ambulation time, and hospital stay showed no statistically significant differences between groups. QoR-15 scores at 48 h were higher in the tegileridine group (median 125 vs 113; P<0.001). Conclusion: Among women undergoing cesarean delivery, tegileridine-based PCIA was associated with a lower incidence of PONV and dizziness and improved postoperative recovery quality compared with sufentanil, while postoperative analgesic outcomes were not significantly different between groups. These findings warrant confirmation in larger multicenter studies before routine clinical adoption.
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.