The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in anesthesiology has become increasingly widespread. However, no previous study has analyzed this field from the bibliometric analysis dimension. The objective of this paper was to assess the global research trends in AI in anesthesiology using bibliometric software. Literatures relevant to AI and anesthesiology were retrieved from the Web of Science until 10 April 2024 and were visualized and analyzed using Excel, CiteSpace, and VOSviewer. After screening, 491 studies were included in the final bibliometric analysis. The growth rate of publications, countries, institutions, authors, journals, literature co-citations, and keyword co-occurrences was computed. The number of publications increased annually since 2018, with the most significant contributions from the USA, China, and England. The top 3 institutions were Yuan Ze University, National Taiwan University, and Brunel University London. The top three journals were Anesthesia & Analgesia, BMC Anesthesiology, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia. The researches on the application of AI in predicting hypotension have been extensive and represented a hotspot and frontier. In terms of keyword co-occurrence cluster analysis, keywords were categorized into four clusters: ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia, postoperative pain and airway management, prediction, depth of anesthesia (DoA), and intraoperative drug infusion. This analysis provides a systematic analysis on the literature regarding the AI-related research in the field of anesthesiology, which may help researchers and anesthesiologists better understand the research trend of anesthesia-related AI.

Objectives: To find out the reasons why patients still need to use rescue analgesics frequently after gastrointestinal tumor surgery under the patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (IV-PCA), and the different abdominal surgery patients using the difference of analgesics. Methods: A total of 970 patients underwent abdominal operation for gastrointestinal tumors were included. According whether patients used dezocine frequently for rescue analgesics within 2 days after surgery, they assigned into two groups: RAN group (Patients who did not frequently use rescue analgesia, 406 cases) and RAY group (Patients who frequently used rescue analgesia, 564 cases). The data collected included patient’s characteristics, postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), nausea and vomiting (PONV), and postoperative activity recovery time. Results: No differences were observed in the baseline characteristics. Compared with the RAN group, patients in the RAY group had a higher proportion of open surgery, upper abdominal surgery, VAS score at rest on the first 2 days after surgery and PONV, and a slower recovery of most postoperative activities. Under the current use of IV-PCA background, the proportion of rescue analgesics used by patients undergoing laparotomy and upper abdominal surgery was as high as 64.33% and 72.8%, respectively. Regression analysis showed that open surgery (vs laparoscopic surgery: OR: 2.288, 95% CI: 1.650–3.172) and the location of the tumor in the upper abdomen (vs lower abdominal tumor: OR: 2.738, 95% CI: 2.034–3.686) were influential factors for frequent salvage administration. Conclusions: In our patient population, with our IV-PCA prescription for postoperative pain control, patient who underwent open upper abdominal surgery required more rescue postoperative analgesia.

Background: Intravenous paracetamol, as an adjunct to multimodal analgesia, has been shown to successfully reduce opioid consumption after joint arthroplasty, abdominal surgery, and caesarean delivery. However, there are limited data on the opioid-sparing effect of intravenous paracetamol on lumbar disc surgery.Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of intravenous paracetamol for reducing opioid consumption in lumbar disc surgery. The primary outcome was cumulative opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively.Method: We followed the PRISMA-P guidelines and used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence. The review was registered in PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42021288168. Two reviewers conducted electronic searches in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, and Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the postoperative opioid consumption of intravenous paracetamol with placebo in lumbar discectomy were included.Results: Five trials comprising a total of 271 patients were included. The overall opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively was reduced [mean difference (MD), −10.61 (95% CI, −16.00 to −5.22) mg, p = 0.0001, I² = 90%] in patients with intravenous paracetamol. Intravenous paracetamol significantly reduced the postoperative pain scores at 1 h [MD, −2.37 (95%CI, −3.81 to −0.94), p = 0.001, I² = 82%], 2 h [MD, −3.17 (95%CI, −3.85 to −2.48), p < 0.00001, I² = 38%], 6 h [MD, −1.75 (95%CI, −3.10 to −0.40), p = 0.01], 12 h [MD, −0.96 (95%CI, −1.77 to −0.15), p = 0.02], and 24 h [MD, −0.97 (95%CI, −1.67 to −0.27), p = 0.006] compared with the placebo. There were no differences in postoperative adverse effects.Conclusion: Intravenous paracetamol reduced postoperative opioid consumption and decreased postoperative pain scores without increasing adverse effects. The overall GRADE quality of the evidence was rated as low to moderate. Intravenous paracetamol appears to be an applicable option as an important part of multimodal analgesia for postoperative analgesia after lumbar disc surgery.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, CRD42021288168.

To investigate the feasibility, effectiveness and safety of bilateral thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) in the post anesthesia care unit (PACU) for pain relief in participants after laparotomy. A single shot of bilateral TPVB with 25 ml of 0.2% ropivacaine and 5 mg dexamethasone in combination for both sides at the 8th thoracic transverse level (T8) was performed on 201 participants who complained moderate to severe pain on arrival to PACU after laparotomy. The visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at rest and on cough, heart rate, blood pressure, and pulse oximetry before and after bilateral TPVB for up to 1 h were recorded. The VAS Pain scores at rest and on cough at 24 h after bilateral TPVB were also recorded. Bilateral TPVB was carried out successfully in all participants. The VAS pain scores at rest and on cough were 7.9 ± 1.6 and 8.7 ± 1.3 respectively pre-bilateral TPVB. The VAS pain scores at rest and on cough were significantly decreased to 1.1 ± 1.2 and 2.1 ± 1.6 respectively (P < 0.001) at 60 min after bilateral TPVB and to 2.1 ± 1.7 and 3.8 ± 1.9 at rest and on cough respectively ((P < 0.001) at 24 h after bilateral TPVB. At 10 min post-bilateral TPVB, only systolic blood pressure was reduced from 122 ± 19 mmHg to 111 ± 18 mmHg (P = 0.007) but then gradually became stable. No complications related to bilateral TPVB were observed. Bilateral TPVB can be provided for pain relief to the participants who suffer from moderate to severe pain after upper laparotomy in the PACU. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-ONN-16009229 , Registered on 10 September 2016.

Objective. To evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of different does of intravenous ibuprofen (IVIB) in the treatment of postoperative acute pain. Methods. Patients with an intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia device after abdominal or orthopedic surgery were randomly divided into placebo, IVIB 400 mg, and IVIB 800 mg groups. The first dosage of study medicines was given intravenously 30 minutes (min) before surgery ended, followed by six hours (h) intervals for a total of eight doses following surgery. The demographic characteristics and procedure data, cumulative morphine consumption, the visual analog scale (VAS), the area under the curve (AUC) of VAS, patient satisfaction score (PSS), the rates of treatment failure (RTF), and adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse event (SAEs) were recorded during the period of trial. Result. A total of 345 patients were enrolled in the full analysis set (FAS), and of 326 participants were valid data set (VDS). Demographic characteristics, disease features, and medical history of patients were not significantly different between groups. Total morphine consumption of the IVIB 400 mg group (11.14 ± 7.14 mg; = 0.0011) and the IVIB 800 mg group (11.29 ± 6.45 mg; = 0.0014) was significantly reduced compared with the placebo group (14.51 ± 9.19 mg) for 24 h postoperatively, there was no significant difference between the IVIB 400 mg and IVIB 800 mg groups ( = 0.9997). The placebo group had significantly higher VAS and the AUCs of VAS than those in the IVIB 400 mg and the IVIB 800 mg groups at rest and movement for 24 h postoperatively ( < 0.05), and there was no significant difference between the IVIB 400 mg and IVIB 800 mg groups ( > 0.05). RTF was slightly higher in the placebo group than IVIB 400 mg group and 800 mg group, and no statistical significance ( < 0.690). PSS in the IVIB 400 mg ( = 0.0092) and the IVIB 800 mg groups ( = 0.0011) was higher than the placebo group for pain management, there was also no significant difference between the IVIB 400 mg and IVIB 800 mg groups ( = 0.456). The incidence of RTF ( = 0.690) and AEs ( > 0.05) were not different among the three groups. Conclusion. Intermittent IV administration of ibuprofen 400 mg or 800 mg within 24 h after surgery in patients undergoing abdominal and orthopedic surgery significantly decreased morphine consumption and relieved pain, without increasing the incidence of AEs.