Effect of Timing of Intravenous Fentanyl Administration on the Incidence of Posttonsillectomy Nausea and Vomiting

Predictive Factors for Delayed Recovery From Anesthesia in Patients Receiving Free Vascularized Flap Reconstruction for Head and Neck Defects: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Free flap reconstruction for head and neck defects is currently a common procedure. This study aimed to create and validate a predictive model for identifying patients at risk of delayed recovery from anesthesia after free flap reconstruction for head and neck defect.

METHODS

Electronic medical records from all patients were retrospectively collected. The primary outcome variable was delayed recovery from anesthesia. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model was employed to identify the most relevant features, followed by the construction of a nomogram model using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The discriminatory power, calibration, and clinical utility of the nomogram model were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, calibration curve analysis, and decision curve analysis, respectively.

RESULTS

This novel nomogram model incorporated 4 predictors for delayed recovery from anesthesia: preoperative albumin, intraoperative fresh frozen plasma infusion, preoperative platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and duration of intraoperative hypotension. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (area under the curve) for the nomogram model was determined to be 0.821 (95% CI: 0.803-0.836). After internal validation, the corrected area under the curve was found to be 0.768 (95% CI: 0.639-0.812). In addition, the model exhibited well-fitted calibration curves and demonstrated favorable clinical usability as indicated by the calibration curve and decision curve analysis curve.

CONCLUSION

The authors created and validated a novel predictive model utilizing a limited number of 4 predictors, yet exhibiting commendable predictive performance. This innovative tool holds the potential to mitigate delayed recovery from anesthesia and enhance the efficient allocation of medical resources.

Effect of additional equipotent fentanyl or sufentanil administration on recovery profiles during propofol-remifentanil-based anaesthesia in patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopic surgery: a randomized clinical trial

Background

In clinical practice, sufentanil has a stronger sedative effect on patients than fentanyl at equivalent doses. This study hypothesized that, at equivalent doses, patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopic surgery (GLS) receiving fentanyl would have an earlier emergence from anaesthesia (EA), a shorter time to extubation (TE), and a better degree of wakefulness. Therefore, this study evaluated the effects of equipotent doses of fentanyl and sufentanil on the quality of emergence in patients undergoing GLS.

Methods

One hundred seven patients scheduled for GLS under general anaesthesia were randomly divided into two groups and were induced with 0.35 µg/kg sufentanil (Group S; n = 55) or 3.5 µg/kg fentanyl (Group F; n = 52). When the GLS was almost over, the patient's abdominal cavity was flushed with warm saline, and 5 µg of sufentanil or 50 µg of fentanyl in a double-blind manner was intravenously injected into the patients. The primary outcomes of the study included EA, TE, the rate of leaving the surgical bed voluntarily and the incidence of endotracheal tube tolerance. The Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS), and Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) scores at 15 and 30 min in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), as well as other adverse events, including nausea and vomiting, itching, delirium, dizziness, chills, and respiratory depression (SpO₂ < 95%) in the PACU, were evaluated as secondary outcomes.

Results

There were no statistically significant dissimilarities between the two groups with respect to baseline characteristics. For recovery, the EA (9.0 ± 4.8 min vs. 8.9 ± 3.0 min; P = 0. 146), TE (9.5 ± 4.7 min vs. 9.0 ± 3.0 min; P = 0.135), rate of leaving the surgical bed voluntarily (31.18% vs. 38.46%; P = 0.976), and incidence of endotracheal tube tolerance (94.55% vs. 96.15%; P = 0.694) were not significantly different between the two groups. In the PACU, the 15-min RSS score (2.07 ± 0.38 vs. 2.15 ± 0.36; P = 0.125), the 30-min RSS score (2.02 ± 0.13 vs. 2.04 ± 0.19; P = 0.207), the 15-min VRS score (0.50 ± 0.57 vs. 0.67 ± 0.55; P = 0.295), and the 30-min VRS score (0.45 ± 0.50 vs. 0.75 ± 0.52; P = 0.102) were not significantly different between Groups S and F. No adverse events, such as nausea, vomiting, pruritus, delirium, and tremors, occurred in either group. The rates of respiratory depression (1.82% vs. 1.92%; P = 0.968) and dizziness (0.00% vs. 4.85%; P = 0.142) were not different between Groups S and F in the PACU.

Conclusions

The majority of patients scheduled for GLS were able to rapidly and smoothly emerge from anaesthesia. After surgery, similar outcomes, including EA, TE, the incidence of endotracheal tube tolerance, the rate of leaving the surgical bed voluntarily, RSS scores, VRS scores, and adverse events in the PACU, were achieved for the patients between the two anaesthetic protocols.