2019•AnaesthesiaOpen access

A comparison of sufentanil vs. remifentanil in fast‐track cardiac surgery patients

Waseem Zakaria Aziz Zakhary, Edwin Wilberforce Turton, Anna Flo Forner, Konstantin von ASPERN, Michael Andrew Borger, Joerg Karl Ender

Open full text 38 citations

Abstract

We retrospectively compared patients receiving remifentanil with patients receiving sufentanil undergoing fast-track cardiac surgery. After 1:1 propensity score matching there were 609 patients in each group. The sufentanil group had a significantly longer mean (SD) ventilation time compared with the remifentanil group; 122 (59) vs. 80 (44) min, p < 0.001 and longer mean (SD) length of stay in the recovery area; 277 (77) vs. 263 (78) min, p = 0.002. The sufentanil group had a lower mean (SD) visual analogue pain score than the remifentanil group; 1.5 (1.2) vs. 2.4 (1.5), p < 0.001 and consumed less mean (SD) piritramide (an opioid analgesic used in our hospital); 2.6 (4.7) vs. 18.9 (7.3) mg, p < 0.001. The results of our study show that although remifentanil was more effective in reducing time to tracheal extubation and length of stay in the recovery area, there was an increased requirement for postoperative analgesia when remifentanil was used.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

We retrospectively compared patients receiving remifentanil with patients receiving sufentanil undergoing fast-track cardiac surgery. After 1:1 propensity score matching there were 609 patients in each group. The sufentanil group had a significantly longer mean (SD) ventilation time compared with the remifentanil group; 122 (59) vs. 80 (44) min, p < 0.001 and longer mean (SD) length of stay in the recovery area; 277 (77) vs. 263 (78) min, p = 0.002. The sufentanil group had a lower mean (SD) visual analogue pain score than the remifentanil group; 1.5 (1.2) vs. 2.4 (1.5), p < 0.001 and consumed less mean (SD) piritramide (an opioid analgesic used in our hospital); 2.6 (4.7) vs. 18.9 (7.3) mg, p < 0.001. The results of our study show that although remifentanil was more effective in reducing time to tracheal extubation and length of stay in the recovery area, there was an increased requirement for postoperative analgesia when remifentanil was used.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 38 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

We retrospectively compared patients receiving remifentanil with patients receiving sufentanil undergoing fast-track cardiac surgery. After 1:1 propensity score matching there were 609 patients in each group. The sufentanil group had a significantly longer mean (SD) ventilation time compared with the remifentanil group; 122 (59) vs. 80 (44) min, p < 0.001 and longer mean (SD) length of stay in the recovery area; 277 (77) vs. 263 (78) min, p = 0.002. The sufentanil group had a lower mean (SD) visual analogue pain score than the remifentanil group; 1.5 (1.2) vs. 2.4 (1.5), p < 0.001 and consumed less mean (SD) piritramide (an opioid analgesic used in our hospital); 2.6 (4.7) vs. 18.9 (7.3) mg, p < 0.001. The results of our study show that although remifentanil was more effective in reducing time to tracheal extubation and length of stay in the recovery area, there was an increased requirement for postoperative analgesia when remifentanil was used.

Key concepts: Remifentanil, Medicine, Sufentanil, Anesthesia, Fast track, Propensity score matching, Opioid, Ventilation (architecture)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A comparison of sufentanil vs. remifentanil in fast‐track cardiac surgery patients — Research Paper | ScholarLens