Opioid-free anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Pooled result · Postoperative NRS scoresResult — go to the resultPooled mean difference 0.39 points CI 0.19–0.59Authors' conclusion
We concluded that we cannot recommend one strategy over the other.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing GA38 studies
- Comparison
- Opioid-free anesthesia vs opioid based anesthesia
- Outcome
- Acute and chronic pain scores (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) or VAS)
Methodological detailsrandom effects model, RoB2 risk of bias assessment
- Random effects model
- RoB2 risk of bias assessment
Pooled result
Postoperative NRS scores · postoperative period
Pooled mean difference
0.39 points
CI 0.19–0.59
OFA vs OBA
pooled mean difference 0.39 points (CI 0.19–0.59)
As reported in the abstract
Further pooled results
| Outcome | Pooled mean difference (MME) (CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Postoperative opioid consumption · postoperative periodNo clinically relevant difference; moderate quality evidence | 4.02 (1.73–6.30) | |
| −50510Difference, MME (linear scale) |
| Outcome | Mean difference (points) |
|---|---|
| Quality of recoverySuperior with OFA · pooled analysis of only two studies | 8.26 |
Safety
- Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occurred less with opioid free anesthesia (OFA), but bradycardia was more frequent
Original publication
Opioid-free anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Anesth. Published 27 July 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →