[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"analgesia\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:analgesia":30},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":7,"results":8},null,90,0,25,[9,49,77,106,145,163,181,229,253,279,309,337,359,390,410,433,455,484,512,541,576,597,624,653,675],{"id":10,"slug":11,"hasResults":12,"nctId":13,"briefTitle":14,"officialTitle":15,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":16,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":20,"enrollmentInfo":21,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":25,"briefSummary":27,"conditions":28,"keywords":31,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":37,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":38,"startDateStruct":41,"completionDateStruct":43,"leadSponsor":45,"locationsCount":48},"100054108","phase-4-ed90-of-epidural-bupivacaine-with-lidocaine-for-the-initiation-of-labor-analgesia-100054108",false,"NCT05543694","ED90 of Epidural Bupivacaine With Lidocaine for the Initiation of Labor Analgesia","ED90 of Epidural Bupivacaine for the Initiation of Labor Analgesia: A Randomized Biased Coin Sequential Allocation Trial With a Lidocaine Test Dose","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Parturient with no major co-morbidities\n* Singleton, vertex gestation at term (37-42 weeks)\n* Less than or equal to 5 cm dilation\n* Desire to receive epidural labor analgesia\n* Numerical Rating Scale greater or equal to 5 (NRS 0-10, where 0 = no pain, and 10 = worst pain imaginable), at time of epidural labor analgesia request.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Current or historical evidence of clinically significant disease or condition, including diseases of pregnancy (i.e preeclampsia, gestational diabetes)\n* Any contraindication to the administration of an epidural technique\n* History of hypersensitivity or idiosyncratic reaction to an amide local anesthetic agent\n* Current or historical evidence of a disease which may result in the risk of a cesarean delivery (i.e. history of uterine rupture). NB: Exception-trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) will be eligible.\n* Evidence of anticipated fetal anomalies",true,"FEMALE","18 Years","50 Years",{"count":22,"type":23},120,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[26],"PHASE4","To estimate the dose of bupivacaine required to achieve initial effective comfort in 90% of patients (ED90) via the epidural (DPE or EPL) technique in women undergoing labor after receiving a lidocaine \"test dose\"",[29,30],"Labor Pain","Analgesia",[32,33,34,35],"Dural puncture epidural","Neuraxial Analgesia","Bupivacaine","Local Anesthetic","RECRUITING","2026-07-10",{"date":39,"type":40},"2026-07-13","ACTUAL",{"date":42,"type":40},"2022-10-01",{"date":44,"type":23},"2027-06-30",{"name":46,"class":47},"Brigham and Women's Hospital","OTHER",1,{"id":50,"slug":51,"hasResults":12,"nctId":52,"briefTitle":53,"officialTitle":54,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":55,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":57,"enrollmentInfo":58,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":60,"briefSummary":62,"conditions":63,"keywords":66,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":69,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":70,"startDateStruct":71,"completionDateStruct":73,"leadSponsor":75,"locationsCount":4},"100053741","ultrasound-guided-parasternalrectus-sheath-block-vs-erector-spinae-plane-block-for-pain-control-in-cardiac-surgery-100053741","NCT07692659","Ultrasound-Guided Parasternal\u002FRectus Sheath Block vs Erector Spinae Plane Block for Pain Control in Cardiac Surgery","Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Bilateral Parasternal Block With Bilateral Rectus Sheath Block Versus Ultrasound Guided Bilateral Erector Spinae Plane Block in Controlling Intra and Post-operative Pain After Cardiac Surgeries","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Both sexes,\n* ASA III-IV patients\n* body mass index between 20- 35 kg\u002Fm2\n* adult patients above 18 years old will be included in the study\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with global hypokinesia\n* ejection fraction \\\u003C 40%\n* low platelet count\n* coagulation impairment\n* deformity in the vertebral column\n* severe renal and hepatic impairment\n* any known allergy to the drugs used","ALL","80 Years",{"count":59,"type":23},50,[61],"NA","The researchers are working to improve recovery after heart surgery by reducing reliance on opioids. Newer regional anesthesia techniques can provide strong pain relief with fewer risks, but the choice of method depends on each patient's condition, medications, and surgical plan",[30,64,65],"Perioperative Analgesia","Regional Block Technique",[67],"Parasternal block; Rectus sheath block; ESPB; Analgesia","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-07-09",{"date":39,"type":40},{"date":72,"type":23},"2026-07",{"date":74,"type":23},"2027-06",{"name":76,"class":47},"National Cancer Institute, Egypt",{"id":78,"slug":79,"hasResults":12,"nctId":80,"briefTitle":81,"officialTitle":81,"acronym":82,"eligibilityCriteria":83,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":57,"enrollmentInfo":84,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":86,"briefSummary":87,"conditions":88,"keywords":95,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":97,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":98,"startDateStruct":100,"completionDateStruct":102,"leadSponsor":104,"locationsCount":48},"100622004","phase-4-safety-and-efficacy-of-esketamine---dexmedetomidine-combination-versus-dexmedetomidine-monotherapy-for-hyperactive-delirium-in-icu-patients-on-non-invasive-respiratory-support-seed-nirs-trial-study-protocol-of-a-randomized-controlled-trial-100622004","NCT07377981","Safety and Efficacy of Esketamine - Dexmedetomidine Combination Versus Dexmedetomidine Monotherapy for Hyperactive Delirium in ICU Patients on Non-Invasive Respiratory Support (SEED-NIRS Trial): Study Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Trial","SEED-NIRS","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Age ≥18 years and ≤80 years at the time of randomization;\n2. Hospitalized in the ICU (with an expected ICU stay \\>24 hours);\n3. Patients with hyperactive delirium: meeting criteria for Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU)\\[19\\] positivity (i.e., acute onset or fluctuating course plus inattention, and at least one secondary criterion-disorganized thinking or altered level of consciousness) and having agitation which is diagnosed if the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score\\[20\\] is superior or equal to +1. (The RASS and CAM-ICU are used to assess sedation and delirium levels. Hyperactive delirium is defined as CAM-ICU positive with RASS \\> +1);\n4. Receiving non-invasive respiratory support (eg. high-flow nasal cannula, CPAP, or non-invasive ventilation) at least for \\>24 hours.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Known or suspected allergy or Contraindications to any of the study drugs;\n2. Severe arrhythmias (e.g., ventricular fibrillation, second- or third-degree atrioventricular block, sick sinus syndrome, ventricular tachycardia, QTc interval ≥470 ms, severe bradycardia (heart rate \\\u003C40 beats per minute), etc.), or left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) \\\u003C30%;\n3. Recent administration of esketamine, dexmedetomidine or haloperidol within previous 72 hours.\n4. Pregnancy or lactation;\n5. Conditions that may affect efficacy assessment or cognitive function testing, such as blindness, deafness, aphasic, or coma patients;\n6. History of epilepsy or seizures;\n7. Patients with an estimated survival period of less than 48 hours as judged by the investigator;\n8. Neuropsychiatric conditions per the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-V) that may introduce bias (e.g., active substance use disorder, psychosis, etc.), including alcoholism, drug abuse, or use of psychotropic medications;\n9. Patients receiving non-invasive respiratory support via a tracheostomy;\n10. Patients with untreated or inadequately treated hyperthyroidism;\n11. Severe hepatic insufficiency (Child-Pugh grade C);\n12. Severe renal dysfunction, defined as: chronic renal insufficiency with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ≤ 29 mL\u002Fmin\u002F1.73 m²; or subjects on long-term maintenance hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis;\n13. A history of sleep disorders requiring medical intervention within the past month;\n14. Patients or their legally authorized representatives (family members) who are unable to cooperate or unwilling to provide written informed consent;\n15. Other conditions deemed unsuitable for inclusion by the investigators.",{"count":85,"type":23},388,[26],"This investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, single-blind, superiority trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of esketamine combined with dexmedetomidine for the management of agitation or delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients receiving non-invasive respiratory support. The primary endpoint is a clinically prioritized hierarchical composite endpoint within 28 days, including intubation or tracheostomy, delirium duration, and agitation duration.",[89,90,30,91,92,93,94],"Dexmedetomidine","Ketamine","Respiratory Therapy","Intensive Care Units (ICUs)","Agitation","Sedation and Analgesia",[96,30,93,89,90,92,91],"Sedation and analgesia","2026-06-30",{"date":99,"type":40},"2026-07-02",{"date":101,"type":23},"2026-08-01",{"date":103,"type":23},"2029-01-01",{"name":105,"class":47},"The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University",{"id":107,"slug":108,"hasResults":12,"nctId":109,"briefTitle":110,"officialTitle":111,"acronym":112,"eligibilityCriteria":113,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":114,"enrollmentInfo":115,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":117,"briefSummary":118,"conditions":119,"keywords":123,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":137,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":138,"startDateStruct":140,"completionDateStruct":141,"leadSponsor":143,"locationsCount":48},"100642443","phase-4-oral-nifedipine-versus-placebo-for-pain-and-healing-after-hemorrhoidectomy-100642443","NCT07659665","Oral Nifedipine Versus Placebo for Pain and Healing After Hemorrhoidectomy","The Effect of Oral Nifedipine Versus Placebo on Postoperative Pain and Healing Following Hemorrhoidectomy in Adult Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Sana'a, Yemen","NIFEDIPINE-HD","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adult patients aged 18-65 years\n* Scheduled for elective hemorrhoidectomy for grade III or IV hemorrhoids\n* Ability to provide written informed consent\n* Ability to understand and complete study questionnaires\n* Willingness to comply with the study protocol and follow-up visits\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known hypersensitivity to nifedipine\n* Severe cardiovascular disease (unstable angina, recent myocardial infarction, severe heart failure)\n* Hypotension (systolic blood pressure \\\u003C 90 mmHg)\n* Severe hepatic or renal impairment\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding\n* Current use of calcium channel blockers or nitrates\n* Emergency hemorrhoidectomy\n* Concurrent inflammatory bowel disease\n* History of anorectal surgery within the past 6 months","65 Years",{"count":116,"type":23},100,[26],"The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether oral nifedipine reduces postoperative pain and improves wound healing after hemorrhoidectomy in adult patients aged 18-65 years undergoing elective surgery for grade III or IV hemorrhoids in Sana'a, Yemen.\n\nThe main questions it aims to answer are:\n\n* Does oral nifedipine 20 mg twice daily for 14 days reduce postoperative pain compared with placebo?\n* Does oral nifedipine improve wound healing progression and shorten time to complete healing compared with placebo?\n\nResearchers will compare the nifedipine group to the placebo group to see if there is a significant reduction in pain scores, faster wound healing, lower analgesic consumption, and fewer complications.\n\nParticipants will:\n\n* Take either oral nifedipine 20 mg or an identical-looking placebo capsule twice daily for 14 consecutive days, starting 6 hours after surgery.\n* Report pain intensity using a standard 0-10 Visual Analogue Scale at multiple time points during the first 28 days.\n* Attend follow-up visits on postoperative days 7, 14, and 28 for wound healing assessment and safety monitoring.\n* Use rescue analgesia (paracetamol and\u002For diclofenac) as needed for breakthrough pain.",[120,121,122,30],"Hemorrhoids","Postoperative Pain","Wound Healing",[124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136],"Hemorrhoidectomy","Post-hemorrhoidectomy pain","Internal anal sphincter","Anal sphincter spasm","Nifedipine","Calcium channel blocker","Randomized controlled trial","Yemen","Placebo","Visual Analogue Scale","Pain management","Wound healing","Ecchymosis Discharge Approximation score","2026-06-27",{"date":139,"type":40},"2026-07-01",{"date":101,"type":23},{"date":142,"type":23},"2026-12-30",{"name":144,"class":47},"Sana'a University",{"id":146,"slug":147,"hasResults":12,"nctId":148,"briefTitle":149,"officialTitle":150,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":151,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":114,"enrollmentInfo":152,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":154,"briefSummary":155,"conditions":156,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":137,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":157,"startDateStruct":158,"completionDateStruct":160,"leadSponsor":162,"locationsCount":48},"100504702","efficacy-of-dexmedetomidine-vs-magnesium-sulphate-with-bupivacaine-in-erector-spinae-block-for-thoracotomy-pain-100504702","NCT05851768","Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine VS Magnesium Sulphate With Bupivacaine in Erector Spinae Block for Thoracotomy Pain","Analgesic Efficacy of Adding Dexmedetomidine VS Magnesium Sulphate as Adjuvants With Bupivacaine in Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block for Post Thoracotomy Pain","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age from 18 to 65 years.\n* Male and female sexes.\n* ASA I-II.,III\n* Cancer patients undergoing thoracotomy incisions\n* Body mass index (BMI) from 18.5 to 30 kg\u002Fm2\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patient refusal\n* Known allergy to any of the used drugs\n* Low platelet count, any coagulation defect",{"count":153,"type":23},60,[61],"Postoperative pain management is considered an integral part of perioperative care in patients undergoing thoracotomy. In order to reduce these complications, multiple regional techniques have been developed for thoracotomy including Intercostal nerve block, Erectospinae plane block and serratus block. Multiple adjuvants have been used in regional analgesia including adrenaline,clonidine,magnesium sulphate,dexmedatomidine and opoids.",[30],{"date":97,"type":40},{"date":159,"type":40},"2023-05-15",{"date":161,"type":23},"2026-12-27",{"name":76,"class":47},{"id":164,"slug":165,"hasResults":12,"nctId":166,"briefTitle":167,"officialTitle":168,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":169,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":114,"enrollmentInfo":170,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":172,"briefSummary":173,"conditions":174,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":137,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":175,"startDateStruct":176,"completionDateStruct":178,"leadSponsor":180,"locationsCount":48},"100467060","efficacy-of-serratus-anterior-plane-block-with-dexmedetomidine-during-breast-surgery-100467060","NCT05361837","Efficacy of Serratus Anterior Plane Block With Dexmedetomidine During Breast Surgery","Efficacy of Single Level Versus Bilevel Serratus Anterior Plane Block With Dexmedetomidine During Breast Cancer Surgery","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* patients scheduled for modified radical mastectomy,\n* Age 18-65 years,\n* ASA I-II\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* patient refusal,\n* coagulation defects,\n* abnormal kidney or liver functions,\n* local infection at site of injection.",{"count":171,"type":23},172,[61],"This study aims to compare single level serratus block versus bilevel serratus block with and without dexmedetomidine in cancer patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy for breast cancer regarding pain control and possible side effects.",[30],{"date":97,"type":40},{"date":177,"type":40},"2022-05-10",{"date":179,"type":23},"2026-11-25",{"name":76,"class":47},{"id":182,"slug":183,"hasResults":12,"nctId":184,"briefTitle":185,"officialTitle":186,"acronym":187,"eligibilityCriteria":188,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":4,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":189,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":191,"briefSummary":194,"conditions":195,"keywords":204,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":221,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":222,"startDateStruct":223,"completionDateStruct":225,"leadSponsor":227,"locationsCount":48},"100601587","phase-1-fentanyl-intranasal-for-retinopathy-of-prematurity-screening-in-preterm-infants-100601587","NCT07112430","Fentanyl Intranasal for Retinopathy of Prematurity Screening in Preterm Infants","Intranasal Fentanyl to Reduce Pain Intensity Associated With Retinopathy of Prematurity Screening in Preterm Infants: A Randomized Control Trial","FIREFLY","Inclusion Criteria\n\n* Preterm infants born ≤31 weeks gestational age and\u002For with birth weight \\\u003C1250 g\n* Scheduled to undergo routine retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening as part of standard NICU care\n* Clinically stable at the time of screening, defined as not requiring acute resuscitative support (no bag-mask ventilation, intubation, or chest compressions within the preceding 24 hours) and maintaining stable cardiorespiratory parameters on baseline respiratory support\n* Written informed consent obtained from a parent or legally authorized representative\n\nExclusion Criteria\n\n* Congenital anomalies or conditions affecting the nasal passages that would interfere with intranasal drug administration\n* Receipt of systemic opioids, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, or other sedative\u002Fanalgesic medications within 24 hours prior to the ROP examination\n* Known hypersensitivity or prior adverse reaction to fentanyl",{"count":190,"type":23},58,[192,193],"PHASE1","PHASE2","The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether intranasal fentanyl (a pain medicine given as a nasal spray) can reduce pain and is safe to use during routine eye examinations for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in preterm infants. ROP is an eye condition that can affect babies born too early and requires regular eye examinations. The main questions this study aims to answer are: Does intranasal fentanyl lower pain during ROP screening? Is intranasal fentanyl safe for preterm infants? Researchers will compare intranasal fentanyl with a placebo (a saltwater spray that contains no medicine) to determine whether the medicine lowers pain during ROP screening.\n\nParticipants will receive either intranasal fentanyl or placebo before their routine ROP eye examination, in addition to the standard comfort measures normally used during the procedure. Researchers will measure participants' pain and monitor their heart rate, oxygen levels, and any side effects during and after the examination.",[196,197,198,199,200,201,202,30,203],"Neonatal Pain","Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP)","Pain Management","Infant, Premature","Fentanyl","Infant, Newborn","Neonatal Intensive Care Units","Intranasal Drug Administration",[205,206,207,208,209,210,211,212,213,214,215,216,217,218,219,220],"intranasal fentanyl","fentanyl","neonatal analgesia","procedural pain","ROP screening","Retinopathy of Prematurity","Preterm infants","Premature infants","infant pain","Non-invasive analgesia","Opioid analgesia","Intranasal drug delivery","Neonatal intensive care","NICU","Pain management in neonates","Infant procedural sedation","2026-06-26",{"date":97,"type":40},{"date":224,"type":23},"2026-09-09",{"date":226,"type":23},"2028-06-01",{"name":228,"class":47},"Marsha Campbell-Yeo",{"id":230,"slug":231,"hasResults":12,"nctId":232,"briefTitle":233,"officialTitle":234,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":235,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":236,"enrollmentInfo":237,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":238,"briefSummary":239,"conditions":240,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":244,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":245,"startDateStruct":247,"completionDateStruct":249,"leadSponsor":251,"locationsCount":48},"100640892","supra-iliac-anterior-quadratus-lumborum-block-and-pericapsular-nerve-group-peng-block-for-analgesia-after-total-hip-arthroplasty-100640892","NCT07606794","Supra-Iliac Anterior Quadratus Lumborum Block and Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block for Analgesia After Total Hip Arthroplasty","A Randomized Clinical Non-Inferiority Trial Comparing Supra-Iliac Anterior Quadratus Lumborum Block and Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block for Analgesia After Total Hip Arthroplasty","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age from 18 to 75 years.\n* Both sexes.\n* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification I-III.\n* Scheduled for primary elective unilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA) under spinal anesthesia.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known allergies to the drugs used.\n* Infection at the injection site.\n* Bleeding disorders.\n* Recognized neuromuscular disorders.\n* Opioid addiction or dependence.\n* Contraindications to regional anesthesia or peripheral nerve blockade.\n* Body mass index (BMI) \\> 40 kg\u002Fm².\n* Associated decompensated cardiac, hepatic, respiratory, or renal diseases.","75 Years",{"count":59,"type":23},[61],"This study aims to compare the analgesic efficacy of supra-iliac anterior quadratus lumborum block (SA-QLB) and pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA).",[241,242,30,243],"Supra-Iliac Anterior Quadratus Lumborum Block","Pericapsular Nerve Group Block","Total Hip Arthroplasty","2026-06-22",{"date":246,"type":40},"2026-06-23",{"date":248,"type":40},"2026-05-23",{"date":250,"type":23},"2026-10-30",{"name":252,"class":47},"Tanta University",{"id":254,"slug":255,"hasResults":12,"nctId":256,"briefTitle":257,"officialTitle":258,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":259,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":260,"maxAge":261,"enrollmentInfo":262,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":264,"briefSummary":265,"conditions":266,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":271,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":272,"startDateStruct":274,"completionDateStruct":276,"leadSponsor":278,"locationsCount":48},"100644175","subtransverse-process-interligamentary-plane-block-versus-rhomboid-intercostal-block-combined-with-sub-serratus-plane-block-for-analgesia-in-pediatric-thoracotomy-100644175","NCT07666334","Subtransverse Process Interligamentary Plane Block Versus Rhomboid Intercostal Block Combined With Sub-Serratus Plane Block for Analgesia in Pediatric Thoracotomy","Ultrasound- Guided Subtransverse Process Interligamentary Plane Block Versus Rhomboid Intercostal Block Combined With Sub-Serratus Plane Block for Analgesia in Pediatric Thoracotomy: A Randomized Controlled Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Pediatric patients between 6 to 12 years.\n* Both sexes.\n* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status I - II.\n* Scheduled for thoracic surgery with thoracotomy incision under general anesthesia.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Parents who refused regional anesthesia.\n* Patients were presented with advanced kidney, cardiac or liver diseases.\n* Coagulation and bleeding disorders.\n* Patients presented with skin or soft tissue infection at the proposed site of needle Insertion.\n* Patients with cognitive impairment.","6 Years","12 Years",{"count":263,"type":23},75,[61],"This study aims to compare ultrasound guided subtransverse process interligamentary plane block versus rhomboid intercostal block combined with sub-serratus plane block for postoperative analgesia in pediatric thoracotomy.",[267,268,269,30,270],"Subtransverse Process Interligamentary Plane Block","Rhomboid Intercostal Block","Sub-Serratus Plane Block","Pediatric Thoracotomy","2026-06-18",{"date":273,"type":40},"2026-06-24",{"date":275,"type":40},"2025-09-01",{"date":277,"type":23},"2027-09-01",{"name":252,"class":47},{"id":280,"slug":281,"hasResults":12,"nctId":282,"briefTitle":283,"officialTitle":284,"acronym":285,"eligibilityCriteria":286,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":114,"enrollmentInfo":287,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":289,"briefSummary":290,"conditions":291,"keywords":296,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":302,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":303,"startDateStruct":304,"completionDateStruct":305,"leadSponsor":307,"locationsCount":48},"100641134","spsip-block-for-pain-control-after-breast-reduction-surgery-100641134","NCT07657949","SPSIP Block for Pain Control After Breast Reduction Surgery","Effect of Ultrasound-Guided Serratus Posterior Superior Intercostal Plane Block on Opioid Consumption After Reduction Mammaplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial","SPSIP-RM","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Female participants aged 18 to 65 years\n* Scheduled for elective bilateral reduction mammaplasty\n* Planned surgery under general anesthesia\n* American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class I to III\n* Planned postoperative clinical follow-up for the first 24 hours after surgery\n* Able to understand and report pain using the 0 to 10 Numeric Rating Scale\n* Able to provide written informed consent for study participation\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known allergy or hypersensitivity to local anesthetic drugs\n* Contraindication to regional anesthesia or fascial plane block\n* Coagulopathy or clinically significant bleeding disorder\n* Use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medication that prevents safe block application\n* Infection at the planned block injection site\n* Chronic opioid use, chronic pain syndrome, or regular analgesic use that may affect postoperative pain assessment\n* Revision breast surgery\n* Planned major additional surgical procedure other than reduction mammaplasty\n* Pregnancy or lactation\n* Unable to reliably report pain scores",{"count":288,"type":23},80,[61],"The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether an ultrasound-guided serratus posterior superior intercostal plane block (SPSIP block) can lower the need for opioid pain medicine after breast reduction surgery.\n\nThe main question it aims to answer is: Does adding an SPSIP block to standard anesthesia and pain treatment lower opioid use during the first 24 hours after surgery? Researchers will compare participants who receive standard anesthesia and pain treatment with participants who receive standard anesthesia and pain treatment plus an SPSIP block.\n\nParticipants will:\n\n* Have planned bilateral breast reduction surgery under general anesthesia\n* Be randomly assigned to the SPSIP block group or the control group\n* Receive standard local anesthetic infiltration during surgery and standard pain treatment after surgery\n* Have their pain score and pain medicine use recorded during the first 24 hours after surgery\n* Be followed for safety and complications for 30 days after surgery",[292,293,30,294,295],"Postoperative Pain Breast Reduction","Mammaplasty","Nerve Block","Opioid Consumption, Postoperative",[297,298,299,300,301],"Serratus posterior superior intercostal plane block","Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia","Reduction mammaplasty","Breast reduction surgery","Postoperative pain","2026-06-14",{"date":271,"type":40},{"date":101,"type":23},{"date":306,"type":23},"2027-08-31",{"name":308,"class":47},"Cumhuriyet University Hospital",{"id":310,"slug":311,"hasResults":12,"nctId":312,"briefTitle":313,"officialTitle":313,"acronym":314,"eligibilityCriteria":315,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":114,"enrollmentInfo":316,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":318,"briefSummary":319,"conditions":320,"keywords":322,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":329,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":330,"startDateStruct":331,"completionDateStruct":333,"leadSponsor":335,"locationsCount":48},"100641067","phase-2-phase-ii-randomized-double-blind-placebo-controlled-clinical-trial-to-evaluate-the-efficacy-and-safety-of-omega-3-fatty-acids-as-an-adjunct-to-morphine-in-acute-postoperative-pain-100641067","NCT07657468","Phase II, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Omega-3 Fatty Acids as an Adjunct to Morphine in Acute Postoperative Pain","O3MORPH","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Able to provide written informed consent prior to any study procedures;\n2. Able to communicate clearly with the Investigator and staff;\n3. Males and females aged 18 to 65;\n4. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) risk class of I to II;\n5. Patients with an indication for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with reduced kidney function (serum creatinine level above 2 mg\u002Fdl).\n* Sensitive to local anesthetics.\n* A history of hepatic insufficiency.\n* Chronic pain.\n* Patients with diabetes.\n* Patients with Body Mass Index (BMI) greater than 35 kg\u002Fm2.\n* Daily intake of analgesics or corticosteroids.\n* Patients with Inflammatory bowel disease.\n* Chronic opioid use.",{"count":317,"type":23},40,[193],"This is a single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group proof-of-concept study to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of omega-3 fatty acids as an adjunct to morphine for acute postoperative pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.\n\nPatients will receive either omega-3 fatty acid supplementation or a placebo before and after surgery. At the end of surgery, a loading dose of morphine of 0.04 mg\u002Fkg body weight will be administered intravenously as a bolus in both groups. The primary endpoint will be the total amount of rescue morphine used during the first 24 postoperative hours.",[321,30],"Pain Postoperative",[323,324,325,326,327,328],"analgesia","post-operation pain","analgesic adjunct","morphine reduction","omega-3 fatty acids","lapararoscopic cholecystectomy","2026-06-13",{"date":271,"type":40},{"date":332,"type":23},"2026-06-15",{"date":334,"type":23},"2026-10-31",{"name":336,"class":47},"National University of La Rioja",{"id":338,"slug":339,"hasResults":12,"nctId":340,"briefTitle":341,"officialTitle":342,"acronym":343,"eligibilityCriteria":344,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":345,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":346,"phases":4,"briefSummary":347,"conditions":348,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":351,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":352,"startDateStruct":353,"completionDateStruct":354,"leadSponsor":356,"locationsCount":48},"100642518","postoperative-analgesia-using-a-perineural-catheter-versus-a-single-nerve-block-in-rearfoot-surgery-100642518","NCT07638514","Postoperative Analgesia Using a Perineural Catheter Versus a Single Nerve Block in Rearfoot Surgery","A Comparative Evaluation of Postoperative Analgesia Using a Perineural Catheter Versus a Single Nerve Block in Rearfoot Surgery","CATHORNOT","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adult patients;\n* Patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA score) of 1, 2, or 3;\n* Patients who have undergone hindfoot surgery;\n* Patients capable of completing the questionnaires.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Contraindications to regional anesthesia (known hypersensitivity to the local anesthetic, infection at the injection site, uncontrolled neurological condition);\n* Emergency surgery\n* Cognitive impairment;\n* Uncontrolled psychiatric condition;\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding;\n* Substance abuse;\n* Use of neuroleptics or lithium;\n* Individuals subject to legal guardianship\n* Individuals deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative order\n* Patients who object to the study.",{"count":153,"type":23},"OBSERVATIONAL","Postoperative pain following hindfoot surgery is often severe and can persist for several days. It frequently leads to the use of systemic analgesics, particularly opioids, whose adverse effects are well known. Furthermore, poorly controlled postoperative pain is a recognized independent risk factor for the development of chronic pain.\n\nAmbulatory perineural catheter techniques, already used in our department for hindfoot surgeries, allow for continuous infusion of local anesthetic. They have demonstrated their efficacy in numerous orthopedic surgeries, but data specific to hindfoot surgery remain limited. It therefore seems appropriate to evaluate whether prolonged analgesia via a perineural catheter improves postoperative pain management and promotes functional recovery.\n\nThe study is conducted as a practice evaluation audit. It relies on the collection of data from routine care, without any modification to intraoperative care. This methodology allows for an objective evaluation of the benefits of the perineural catheter compared to a single-injection popliteal sciatic block with local anesthetic, while documenting the frequency and nature of complications associated with the technique (leaks, accidental or intentional catheter removal).",[349,30,350],"Hindfoot Surgery","Perineural Catheter","2026-06-11",{"date":332,"type":40},{"date":101,"type":23},{"date":355,"type":23},"2027-02-07",{"name":357,"class":358},"University Hospital, Angers","OTHER_GOV",{"id":360,"slug":361,"hasResults":12,"nctId":362,"briefTitle":363,"officialTitle":364,"acronym":365,"eligibilityCriteria":366,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":367,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":368,"briefSummary":369,"conditions":370,"keywords":374,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":381,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":382,"startDateStruct":384,"completionDateStruct":386,"leadSponsor":388,"locationsCount":48},"100513156","offset-mechanisms-in-evaluation-of-lumbar-medial-branch-blocks-100513156","NCT05961800","Offset Mechanisms in Evaluation of Lumbar Medial Branch Blocks","OMEGA Study: Offset Mechanisms in Evaluation of Lumbar Medial Branch Block","OMEGA","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Scheduled for lumbar MBB in UPMC Pain Management clinics\n* Age \\> 18 years old\n* Predominantly axial chronic low back pain at least 3 months on a daily basis\n* Must meet the minimum criteria for cognitive function using the PROMIS 2-item cognitive screener (\\>3)\n* Low back pain intensity of \\> 3\u002F10\n* Willing and able to receive study-related phone calls\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* History of spine surgery at the level of the lumbar MBB\n* Active worker's compensation or litigation claims\n* New pain and\u002For psychiatric treatments within 2 weeks of enrollment\n* Not fluent in English and\u002For not able to complete the questionnaires\n* Any clinically unstable systemic illness that is judged to interfere with the study",{"count":317,"type":23},[61],"This study examines the relationship between central nervous system (CNS) mechanisms of pain inhibition and the pain relief that occurs following a lumbar medial branch block (MBB).",[371,372,373,30],"Pain, Chronic","Facet Joint Pain","Pain, Procedural",[375,376,377,378,379,380],"lumbar","medial branch block","offset analgesia","onset hyperalgesia","QST","quantitative sensory testing","2026-06-02",{"date":383,"type":40},"2026-06-04",{"date":385,"type":40},"2023-07-05",{"date":387,"type":23},"2028-06",{"name":389,"class":47},"University of Pittsburgh",{"id":391,"slug":392,"hasResults":12,"nctId":393,"briefTitle":394,"officialTitle":395,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":396,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":397,"maxAge":261,"enrollmentInfo":398,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":399,"briefSummary":400,"conditions":401,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":402,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":403,"startDateStruct":405,"completionDateStruct":406,"leadSponsor":408,"locationsCount":4},"100640862","analgesia-for-perineal-surgeries-in-high-risk-pediatric-patients-100640862","NCT07602894","Analgesia for Perineal Surgeries in High-risk Pediatric Patients","Efficacy of Ultrasound-guided Sacral Multifidus Plane Block as Perioperative Analgesia for Anal and Penile Surgeries in High-risk Pediatric Patients","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Parents or caregivers' acceptance.\n* High-risk pediatric patients (the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class III-IV)\n* Body mass index equal to 5%: 85% of the same age and sex.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Child with a contraindication to the regional block, such as infection at the site of injection, or coagulopathy.\n* Pre-existing neurological disorders.","12 Months",{"count":153,"type":23},[61],"Perioperative pain management in pediatric patients, especially for anorectal and penile surgeries, presents significant challenges for anesthetists. Complications associated with systemic analgesia, such as respiratory issues, cardiovascular problems, and neurological effects, can be avoided by using regional anesthesia. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided Sacral Multifidus Plane Block as a method for perioperative analgesia in high-risk pediatric patients undergoing anorectal and penile surgeries, to reduce the risks associated with systemic analgesia.",[30],"2026-05-21",{"date":404,"type":40},"2026-05-22",{"date":72,"type":23},{"date":407,"type":23},"2027-12",{"name":409,"class":358},"Zagazig University",{"id":411,"slug":412,"hasResults":12,"nctId":413,"briefTitle":414,"officialTitle":415,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":416,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":114,"enrollmentInfo":417,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":419,"briefSummary":420,"conditions":421,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":425,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":426,"startDateStruct":427,"completionDateStruct":429,"leadSponsor":431,"locationsCount":48},"100498953","phase-4-evaluation-of-the-effects-of-ketorolac-dose-on-duration-of-analgesia-in-emergency-department-ed-renal-colic-patients-100498953","NCT05776953","Evaluation of the Effects of Ketorolac Dose on Duration of Analgesia in Emergency Department (ED) Renal Colic Patients","Evaluation of the Effects of Ketorolac 15mg IV Versus 30mg IV on Duration of Analgesia in Patients Who Present to the Emergency Department With Renal Colic","Inclusion Criteria:\n\nPatients will be included if they present to the Emergency Department with (all of the following):\n\n* Adult emergency department patients \\\u003C 65 years old\n* One or more of the following common ED chief complaints associated with the suspected diagnosis of renal colic. These chief complaints include but are not limited to: flank pain, back pain, abdominal pain, left and\u002For right lower quadrant pain, and\u002For pelvic pain\n* Pain score of 4 or greater on the 0-10 NRS\n* Determination of treatment with IV ketorolac\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\nPatients will be excluded if any of the following apply:\n\n* Allergy to ketorolac\n* Pregnant patients\n* Previously received analgesic medications within 4 hours prior to administration of ketorolac in our ED\n* Known or stated history of renal insufficiency\n* Body weight \\\u003C 50 kg\n* Age greater than 65 years\n* Patients that do no read\u002Fwrite Spanish or English",{"count":418,"type":23},86,[26],"This is a prospective interventional study examining the effect of ketorolac at doses of 15mg versus 30 mg for duration of analgesia in emergency department patients with suspected renal colic.",[422,423,424,30],"Renal Colic","Flank Pain","Emergencies","2026-05-20",{"date":404,"type":40},{"date":428,"type":40},"2023-12-21",{"date":430,"type":23},"2026-09-01",{"name":432,"class":47},"Hackensack Meridian Health",{"id":434,"slug":435,"hasResults":12,"nctId":436,"briefTitle":437,"officialTitle":437,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":438,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":439,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":440,"briefSummary":441,"conditions":442,"keywords":444,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":446,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":447,"startDateStruct":449,"completionDateStruct":451,"leadSponsor":453,"locationsCount":48},"100532488","phase-4-transversus-abdominis-plane-block-compared-to-local-anesthetic-wound-infiltration-in-gynecologic-oncology-surgery-100532488","NCT06213454","Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Compared to Local Anesthetic Wound Infiltration in Gynecologic Oncology Surgery","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Ability to understand and the willingness to sign a written informed consent document\n* Patients undergoing exploratory laparotomy via midline vertical skin incision for gynecologic indications at UW Hospital and Clinics\n* Patients must be \\>18 years old\n* English speaking (able to provide consent and complete questionnaires)\n* Patients must have the ability to understand visual and verbal pain scales\n* Patients must be eligible for TAP block placement. This will be confirmed during preoperative visit with the primary surgeon. Patient's are not eligible if they have allergies to the anesthetic medications or have had prior abdominal reconstructive surgery that would alter their abdominal wall anatomy in a way where the block would not be expected to be effective.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known allergy to local anesthetics.\n* Known history of chronic pain disorders and\u002For chronic opioid use defined as greater than 10mg of PO morphine or equivalent used daily for at least 30 days prior to enrollment.\n* Patient has a history of opioid dependence requiring rehabilitation or the use of opioid antagonists.\n* Patients with a planned exploration with biopsies (no organs removed) will be excluded from the study.\n* Individuals who are pregnant, lactating or planning on becoming pregnant during the study.\n* Significant liver disease that would inhibit prescription of opioids.\n* Significant kidney disease that would inhibit administration of gabapentin.\n* Not suitable for study participation due to other reasons at the discretion of the investigators.",{"count":288,"type":23},[26],"This study is being done to see if preoperative transversus abdominis plane (TAP) analgesia will provide similar postoperative pain control, hospital length of stay, and postoperative outcomes compared to surgeon-initiated wound infiltration with local anesthetic in participants undergoing laparotomy for gynecologic indications.",[30,443],"Surgery",[445],"laparotomy","2026-05-15",{"date":448,"type":40},"2026-05-18",{"date":450,"type":40},"2024-03-26",{"date":452,"type":23},"2026-08",{"name":454,"class":47},"University of Wisconsin, Madison",{"id":456,"slug":457,"hasResults":12,"nctId":458,"briefTitle":459,"officialTitle":460,"acronym":461,"eligibilityCriteria":462,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":463,"maxAge":464,"enrollmentInfo":465,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":467,"briefSummary":468,"conditions":469,"keywords":472,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":476,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":477,"startDateStruct":478,"completionDateStruct":480,"leadSponsor":482,"locationsCount":48},"100640623","rectus-sheath-block-versus-transversus-abdominis-plane-block-for-analgesia-in-laparoscopic-bariatric-surgery-100640623","NCT07592091","Rectus Sheath Block Versus Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Analgesia in Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery","Comparison of Rectus Sheath Block and Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Analgesia in Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial","RSB-TAPB","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients aged 20-60 years old\n* Scheduled for elective LBS including laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, proximal jejunal bypass, and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass\n* American Society of Anesthesia (ASA) physical status III\n* Have ability to communicate and understand the study and accept to participate in the study\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients who have following underlying disease: severe hepatic impairment \\[diagnosed of cirrhosis (Child-Pugh C)\\], coagulopathy (diagnosed of disease associated with abnormal coagulation), pre-existing neurological deficits, chronic pain (diagnosed of chronic pain disease or current use regular analgesic drugs), or any drug addiction.\n* Known allergy to bupivacaine or weighing less than 60 kg, as the planned doses of bupivacaine may exceed safe maximum limits.\n* Patient with previous foregut surgery including esophageal, gastric, liver and pancreases resection.","20 Years","60 Years",{"count":466,"type":23},96,[61],"This randomized controlled trial aims to compare the analgesic efficacy of rectus sheath block (RSB) and transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) in patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Both techniques are regional anesthesia methods used as part of multimodal analgesia to reduce postoperative pain and opioid requirements.\n\nEligible participants will be randomly assigned to receive either a RSB or a TAPB after general anesthesia. Postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, recovery outcomes, area of sensory loss, time to first rescue analgesia, and block-related adverse events will be assessed and compared between the two groups.\n\nThis study will help determine which regional anesthesia technique provides more effective postoperative analgesia for laparoscopic bariatric surgery",[470,471,295,30],"Rectus Sheath Block","Transverse Abdominis Plane Block",[470,473,474,475,323],"Transversus abdominis plane block","Laparoscopic bariatric surgery","opioid consumption","2026-05-13",{"date":448,"type":40},{"date":479,"type":23},"2026-05-10",{"date":481,"type":23},"2031-06-30",{"name":483,"class":47},"Chiang Mai University",{"id":485,"slug":486,"hasResults":12,"nctId":487,"briefTitle":488,"officialTitle":488,"acronym":489,"eligibilityCriteria":490,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":491,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":493,"briefSummary":495,"conditions":496,"keywords":499,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":504,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":505,"startDateStruct":506,"completionDateStruct":508,"leadSponsor":510,"locationsCount":48},"100361323","phase-3-evaluation-of-the-analgesia-by-serratus-plane-block-during-pleural-drainage-in-intensive-care-unit-100361323","NCT03984656","Evaluation of the Analgesia by Serratus Plane Block During Pleural Drainage in Intensive Care Unit.","SERRATUS","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* patients over 18 years old.\n* non-intubated patient with spontaneous ventilation\n* free and informed consent of the patient,\n* affiliated to a social security scheme\n* hospitalized in ICU unit including surgical ICU, cardiothoracic and respiratory ICU or cardiothoracic and respiratory continuous care unit.\n* requiring pleural drainage gas or fluid\n* conscious patient, not sedated.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* patient under the age of 18 years old.\n* patient refusal\n* under curatorship or deprivation of liberty\n* pregnant, parturient or breastfeeding woman\n* contraindication to Lidocaine or Ropivacaine\n* coagulation disorders",{"count":492,"type":23},70,[494],"PHASE3","Pleural drainage under local anesthesia is a frequent practice in resuscitation, experienced as an unpleasant and painful event for patients. Pain management is an important issue for early rehabilitation, decrease hospitalisation's cost and shortening the length of stay in intensive care unit (ICU). A new type of locoregional anesthesia called Serratus plane block described by Blanco in 2013 showed a benefit in per and postoperative analgesia in thoracic surgery and carcinologic breast surgery, allowing a decrease in morphine use and an improvement of the patient's general satisfaction. Serratus plane block is a very effective technique in chest wall analgesia, easy and safe to perform, with few complications. No studies to date have evaluated this anesthetic practice in intensive care for pleural drainage. This technique could be used outside the operating room to improve the intensive care patients, who often have heavier pathologies and greater pain, such as patients with chest trauma or patients with cardiac or respiratory disease. The investigators would like to conduct a preliminary study of superiority in the CHU Amiens intensive care unit, to study the interest of the Serratus plane block in comparison with local anesthesia on the management of acute pain during pleural drainage.",[30,497,498],"Lidocaine","Intensive Care Unit",[500,323,501,502,503],"serratus plane block","pleural drainage","lidocaine","intensive care unit","2026-05-12",{"date":476,"type":40},{"date":507,"type":40},"2019-06-04",{"date":509,"type":23},"2026-09-06",{"name":511,"class":47},"Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Amiens",{"id":513,"slug":514,"hasResults":12,"nctId":515,"briefTitle":516,"officialTitle":517,"acronym":518,"eligibilityCriteria":519,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":520,"enrollmentInfo":521,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":523,"briefSummary":524,"conditions":525,"keywords":526,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":532,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":533,"startDateStruct":535,"completionDateStruct":537,"leadSponsor":539,"locationsCount":48},"100537755","phase-1-nebulized-fentanyl-in-healthy-volunteers-100537755","NCT06281951","Nebulized Fentanyl in Healthy Volunteers","Nebulized Fentanyl in Healthy Volunteers : Comparison of Facial Versus Intranasal Aerosol Administration by Pharmacometric Modeling","AEROfen","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age ≥ 18 years and \\\u003C 68 years\n* BMI between 19 and 29 kg\u002Fm²\n* Affiliation to a social security scheme\n* Adult who has read and understood the information letter and signed the consent form\n* Woman capable of procreating (a woman is considered capable of procreating, i.e. fertile, after menarche and until she becomes menopausal, unless she is definitely sterile ) having very effective contraception (combined hormonal contraception (containing estrogens and progestins) associated with inhibition of ovulation, progestin-only hormonal contraception associated with inhibition of ovulation, intrauterine device, hormone-releasing intrauterine system (IUS), bilateral tubal occlusion, vasectomized partner, sexual abstinence) for 1 year and a negative urine pregnancy test at inclusion and during the duration of the study.\n* Woman definitely surgically sterile (hysterectomy, bilateral salpingectomy and bilateral oophorectomy). Postmenopausal woman: The postmenopausal state is defined by the absence of periods for 12 months without any other medical cause.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Weight \\\u003C 50 kg\n* Taking long-term painkillers or narcotics\n* Sharp pain\n* Stable chronic pain (\\>3 months, with or without long-term treatment)\n* Known chronic pathology stabilized or decompensated (hypertension, renal, cardiac, hepatic insufficiency, etc.)\n* Stable or decompensated chronic respiratory pathology\n* Chronic neuropsychiatric pathology likely to modify the pain threshold\n* Long-term treatment with an action on the nervous system such as respiratory depression: benzodiazepines, neuroleptics, agonist\u002Fantagonist of the opioid system\n* Treatment or toxicant whose association is not recommended with fentanyl (alcohol, cannabis, etc.)\n* Central nervous system modulator treatment\n* Pathologies blocking the pupillary response: Claude-Bernard-Horner syndrome, Adie syndrome, Argyll-Robertson pupil, senile miosis, dysautonomic neuropathy (advanced diabetes, systemic amyloidosis), cataract\n* Treatment responsible for fluctuation in PUAL measurements: parasympathetic modulators (clonidine, dexmedetomidine, droperidol, metoclopramide)\n* No-indication to FENTANYL PIRAMAL 100µg\u002F2mL, solution for injection in ampoule\n* No-indication to PROAMP SODIUM CHLORIDE 0.9%, solution for injection\n* Ongoing treatment with nasal vasoconstrictors\n* Peripheral oxygen saturation less than 93%\n* Alteration of cognitive state: comprehension disorder, language disorder, memory disorder, confusion\n* Deaf or mute patient\n* Usual heart rate such as HR\\\u003C 40 bpm and\u002For hypotension with systolic blood pressure SBP\\\u003C 100 mm Hg\n* Atrioventricular block on ECG\n* History of cataract surgery\n* Confirmed or suspected covid 19 \u002F active flu infection less than 15 days old\n* Allergy to plastic\n* Pregnant or parturient or breastfeeding woman or proven absence of contraception\n* Person deprived of liberty by an administrative or judicial decision or person placed under judicial protection\u002Funder guardianship or curatorship\n* Person participating in research participating in another trial \u002F having participated in another trial within 2 weeks\n* History of illness or psychological or sensory abnormality likely to prevent the subject from fully understanding the conditions required for participation in the protocol or preventing them from giving informed consent","68 Years",{"count":522,"type":23},20,[192],"Pain constitutes the predominant motive prompting individuals to seek emergency medical attention, accounting for 80% of admissions to emergency departments. Presently, it is imperative to employ expeditious and efficacious analgesia-sedation methodologies, obviating the necessity for intravenous administration, while ensuring the secure delivery of pharmaceutical agents. The objective of this study is to assess the feasibility and comfort of nebulized intranasal or facial aerosol administration of Fentanyl through the implementation of a pharmacokinetic\u002Fpharmacodynamic (PK\u002FPD) study",[30,424],[527,528,200,529,530,531],"Severe acute pain","Pharmacometry","Emergency medicine","Pupillometry (PUAL)","Non-invasive analgesia (Intranasal, Facial aerosol)","2026-05-06",{"date":534,"type":40},"2026-05-11",{"date":536,"type":40},"2024-04-26",{"date":538,"type":23},"2027-06-01",{"name":540,"class":47},"University Hospital, Rouen",{"id":542,"slug":543,"hasResults":12,"nctId":544,"briefTitle":545,"officialTitle":546,"acronym":547,"eligibilityCriteria":548,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":549,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":550,"briefSummary":551,"conditions":552,"keywords":559,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":570,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":571,"startDateStruct":572,"completionDateStruct":573,"leadSponsor":574,"locationsCount":48},"100640195","feasibility-of-protocolised-analgosedation-in-ecmo-100640195","NCT07580781","Feasibility of Protocolised Analgosedation in ECMO","Feasibility of a Cluster Randomised Control Trial Evaluating a Co-designed Analgosedation Protocol in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) Patients","ECMO-SED","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Aged 18 years and older\n* Receiving IV continuous infusions of analgosedation medication\n* Receiving ECMO treatment\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* There will be no exclusion criteria as analgosedation management is routine for all adult ECMO patients.",{"count":153,"type":23},[61],"Sedation (painkillers and sedative drugs) treats pain, reduces suffering, and helps patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) remain comfortable. ECMO is a life support machine that provides oxygen and removes waste gases (carbon dioxide) in very sick patients with severe heart or lung failure. About 300-400 patients per year receive ECMO in the UK. These patients are younger and generally more healthy compared to other critically ill patients. However patients that survive ECMO have long-term health problems. These include anxiety, memory problems, withdrawal from medicines, and mobility issues. These problems issues could all be related to the type and amount of sedation given.\n\nA sedation protocol is a way of guiding healthcare professionals how much sedation is given to patients in ICU. Too much sedation can cause confusion, hallucinations, excessive sleepiness, and longer time in hospital. Too little sedation can cause pain, distress, and also a longer time in hospital. Using a sedation protocol in non-ECMO patients has been shown to reduce these complications.\n\nHowever, there are no protocols for giving sedation to ECMO patients in research papers. Investigators know healthcare staff find it difficult to manage sedation, and higher amounts of sedation is given to ECMO patients.\n\nAims:\n\nTo see whether it is possible to run a trial that compares using a sedation protocol against usual care.\n\nDesign\u002Fmethods:\n\nThirty to 60 ECMO patients will be chosen and will be put into one of two groups. One group will receive usual care, and the other will receive care using the sedation protocol. The investigators will collect information from both groups to find out if the study design works and how many patients agree to take part.\n\nPatient and public involvement\u002Fengagement:\n\nThe investigators received feedback from patients and family member participants which helped to design this proposal, the lay summary and what to measure in a trial. They will advise how the investigators should review study findings, and support sharing of results to the public.\n\nImpact\u002Fdissemination:\n\nThe investigators will share findings through social media, patient charities, research papers and conferences.",[553,554,94,555,556,557,558,30],"Intensive Care (ICU)","Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS)","Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation","Sedation for Mechanical Ventilation","Cardiogenic Shock","Opioid Analgesia",[560,561,562,563,564,565,566,567,498,568,569,323],"extracorporeal membrane oxygenation","sedation","opioid","sedative","analgosedation","mechanical ventilation","ECMO","ICU","Critical Care","sedation protocol","2026-05-05",{"date":504,"type":40},{"date":430,"type":23},{"date":306,"type":23},{"name":575,"class":47},"Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust",{"id":577,"slug":578,"hasResults":12,"nctId":579,"briefTitle":580,"officialTitle":581,"acronym":547,"eligibilityCriteria":582,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":583,"enrollmentInfo":584,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":346,"phases":4,"briefSummary":585,"conditions":586,"keywords":589,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":570,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":591,"startDateStruct":593,"completionDateStruct":595,"leadSponsor":596,"locationsCount":48},"100595479","improving-sedation-practice-in-critically-ill-adult-patients-using-a-co-designed-sedation-protocol-100595479","NCT07032987","Improving Sedation Practice in Critically Ill Adult Patients Using a Co-designed Sedation Protocol","Optimising Analgosedation in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) Using a Co-designed Analgosedation Protocol","Stage 1 (multi-centre observational study):\n\nInclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Aged 18 years and older.\n2. Receiving continuous IV infusions of analgosedation (opioids, benzodiazepines, and\u002For propofol).\n3. Receiving ECMO for moderate to severe respiratory failure (PaO2\u002FFiO2 (P\u002FF) ratio \\\u003C20 kilopascals (kPa)) for ≤ 7 days during the week of recruitment.\n4. Non-ECMO ICU patients (control group): must satisfy inclusion criteria 1 and 2, and have received mechanical ventilation for moderate to severe respiratory failure (P\u002FF ratio \\\u003C 20kPa) for at least 48 hours OR mechanical ventilation for cardiovascular disorder (out of hospital cardiac arrest, following cardiothoracic or transplant surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention or acute heart failure).\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Anticipated length of ICU stay in recruiting centre for less than 24 hours.\n2. Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the next 24 hours.\n\nStage 2 (mixed methods study):\n\nInclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Healthcare professionals working at one of two ECMO centres (St Thomas' Hospital and Royal Brompton Hospital (part of Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust).\n2. ECMO survivors (patients admitted to ICU and survived ECMO organ support) who have returned home, and recovered.\n3. Family members of ECMO survivors, whose relative is no longer hospitalised.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. ECMO survivors currently receiving treatment in hospital.\n2. ECMO survivors with severe cognitive issues (issues with short-term memory and thinking).\n3. ECMO survivors who cannot communicate in English.\n4. Non-ECMO survivors and family members.","100 Years",{"count":22,"type":23},"Sedation (painkillers and sedative drugs) treats pain, reduces suffering, and helps patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) remain comfortable. ECMO is a life support machine that provides oxygen and removes waste gases (carbon dioxide) in very sick patients with severe heart or lung failure. About 300-400 patients per year receive ECMO in the UK. These patients are younger and generally more healthy compared to other critically ill patients. However patients that survive ECMO have long-term health problems. These include anxiety, memory problems, withdrawal from medicines, and mobility issues. These problems issues could all be related to the type and amount of sedation given.\n\nA sedation protocol is a way of guiding healthcare professionals how much sedation is given to patients in ICU. Too much sedation can cause confusion, hallucinations, excessive sleepiness, and longer time in hospital. Too little sedation can cause pain, distress, and also a longer time in hospital. Using a sedation protocol in non-ECMO patients has been shown to reduce these complications.\n\nHowever, there are no protocols for giving sedation to ECMO patients in research papers. The investigators know healthcare staff find it difficult to manage sedation, and higher amounts of sedation is given to ECMO patients.\n\nAims:\n\n* To describe current sedation use in ECMO patients in the UK and compare to non-ECMO critically ill patients.\n* To develop a sedation protocol for ECMO patients with input from patients, their family, and staff.\n\nDesign\u002Fmethods:\n\nStudy 1:\n\nThe investigators will study how sedation is used in adult ECMO patients and compare with non-ECMO but critically ill patients in the UK. The investigators will collect information on drug doses and pain and sedation scores. The investigators will also ask ECMO centres if they use a sedation protocol to adjust sedation doses. This information will be helpful for the design of the protocol in study 2.\n\nStudy 2:\n\nThe investigators will design a sedation protocol with input from patients, family, and staff. The investigators will organise meetings to share experiences and agree on what to include in the protocol that is considered acceptable and safe. The investigators will then assess if the protocol is safe and acceptable with staff outside the co-design group.\n\nPatient and public involvement\u002Fengagement:\n\nThe investigators received feedback from patients and family members which helped to design this proposal, the lay summary and what to measure in a trial. Patients and family members will continue to help with development of the sedation and trial protocol. They will advise how the investigators should review study findings, and support sharing of results to the public.\n\nImpact\u002Fdissemination:\n\nThe investigators will share findings through social media, patient charities, research papers and conferences.",[587,554,94,588,556,557,558,30],"Intensive Care Medicine","ExtraCorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO)",[560,561,562,590,564,565,566,567,498,568,569,323],"sedatives",{"date":592,"type":40},"2026-05-08",{"date":594,"type":40},"2025-11-24",{"date":306,"type":23},{"name":575,"class":47},{"id":598,"slug":599,"hasResults":12,"nctId":600,"briefTitle":601,"officialTitle":602,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":603,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":604,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":605,"briefSummary":606,"conditions":607,"keywords":612,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":616,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":617,"startDateStruct":618,"completionDateStruct":620,"leadSponsor":622,"locationsCount":48},"100560360","ultrasound-guided-transversus-abdominis-plan-tap-block-in-endovascular-cardiac-interventions-100560360","NCT06576128","Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plan (TAP) Block in Endovascular Cardiac Interventions","Analgesic Effect of Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plan (TAP) Block in Femoral Endovascular Cardiac Interventions: A Prospective-randomized Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* The patient is over 18 years of age\n* Coronary angiography, cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention will be applied to the patient,\n* The above-mentioned procedures will be taken under elective conditions,\n* Providing an optimal image when imaging the patient with ultrasound,\n* INR\\\u003C 1.5\n* If the patient gives consent, S\u002Fhe will be included in the study.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients under 18 years of age,\n* Patients treated under emergency conditions,\n* morbid obesity (BMI\\>35 kg\u002Fm2),\n* pregnant women,\n* New York Heart Association (NYHA) stage 4 patients with advanced decompensated heart failure,\n* Patients with symptoms such as redness, temperature increase, infection, hematoma in the application area before the procedure,\n* Patients with a history of allergy to local anesthetics,\n* Patients who cannot be communicated,\n* Those with severe psychosis or progressive neurological deficits and muscle disease,\n* Patients who do not consent to the application will be excluded from the study.",{"count":116,"type":23},[61],"Sensory innervation of the femoral region which is the entry point for endovascular cardiac interventions such as coronary angiography,cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention is complex.It is thought that the ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric nerves contribute mostly.With transversus abdominis plane block(TAPB),it is planned to provide analgesia by creating a block in these nerve branches that contribute to the sensory innervation of the intervention area.In addition;it was aimed to investigate patient's and physician's satisfaction during the procedure.",[608,609,610,30,611],"Anesthesiology","Percutaneous Coronary Intervention","Cardiac Catheterization","Satisfaction, Patient",[613,614,615,609,610,323],"ultrasonography","anesthesiology","transversus abdominis plane block","2026-05-04",{"date":592,"type":40},{"date":619,"type":40},"2024-09-10",{"date":621,"type":23},"2026-12-15",{"name":623,"class":47},"Istanbul University - Cerrahpasa",{"id":625,"slug":626,"hasResults":12,"nctId":627,"briefTitle":628,"officialTitle":629,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":630,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":631,"maxAge":632,"enrollmentInfo":633,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":634,"briefSummary":635,"conditions":636,"keywords":642,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":644,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":645,"startDateStruct":647,"completionDateStruct":649,"leadSponsor":651,"locationsCount":48},"100635814","effect-of-opioid-free-vs-opioid-based-anesthesia-on-postoperative-pain-and-emergence-agitation-in-children-undergoing-cleft-surgery-100635814","NCT07557576","Effect of Opioid-Free vs Opioid-Based Anesthesia on Postoperative Pain and Emergence Agitation in Children Undergoing Cleft Surgery","Comparison of Impact of Opioid and Non-Opioid Anesthesia on Pain and Agitation Levels in Children After Cleft Lip and Palate Surgery","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* ASA physical status I-II\n* Body weight \\>5 kg\n* Age ≥3 months for cleft lip repair and ≥9 months for cleft palate repair\n* Hemoglobin \\>100 g\u002FL\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* ASA physical status III-IV\n* Body weight \\\u003C5 kg\n* Age \\\u003C3 months for cleft lip repair or \\\u003C9 months for cleft palate repair\n* Hemoglobin \\\u003C100 g\u002FL\n* Acute illness\n* Respiratory infection or vaccination within 2 weeks prior to surgery\n* Requirement for perioperative intensive care","3 Months","7 Years",{"count":5,"type":23},[61],"Orofacial clefts are among the most common congenital malformations, affecting approximately 1 in 700-1500 live births worldwide. They are associated not only with aesthetic concerns but also with functional impairments in feeding, speech, hearing, and dentition, and may be accompanied by other systemic malformations, often requiring multiple surgical procedures and long-term multidisciplinary care. Although cognitive development is preserved, the psychosocial impact on both children and families can be significant.\n\nAnesthesia in children with clefts presents specific challenges. Airway management is often more difficult due to anatomical variations, particularly in syndromic patients and those under 1 year of age. Immature organ systems affect drug metabolism, requiring careful dose adjustment. Preoperative anxiety and stress responses are common and may contribute to complications such as laryngospasm and bronchospasm. In the postoperative period, emergence agitation (EA) and emergence delirium (ED) are frequent, with reported incidence up to 80%. These conditions are characterized by restlessness, inconsolability, and disorientation, and may result in self-injury or disruption of surgical repairs.\n\nDifferentiating agitation from pain is challenging in young children due to limited communication abilities. Validated observational tools such as CHIPPS, PAEDS, and Cravero scales are used for routine clinical assessment of pain and EA\u002FED, although their subjective nature may limit accuracy. Therefore, evaluation of the perioperative serum cortisol, alpha-amylase, and neuropeptide Y levels will be used. These biomarkers reflect activation of the physiological stress response and indirectly indicate the presence and intensity of pain.\n\nPain management requires a multimodal approach. While opioids remain standard, their use is associated with adverse effects such as respiratory depression, nausea, vomiting, and delayed recovery. Consequently, opioid-free (OF) strategies using different anesthetics, including ketamine and dexmedetomidine have gained attention.\n\nThis prospective randomized clinical trial will compare opioid-based anesthesia with an opioid-free protocol in children undergoing cleft surgery. A total of 90 patients age of 3 months-7 years will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio. The opioid group will receive fentanyl, while the OF group will receive ketamine and dexmedetomidine; both groups will receive propofol, vecuronium, sevoflurane, and nitrous oxide.\n\nPrimary outcomes are postoperative pain (CHIPPS) and emergence agitation (PAEDS, Cravero). Pain will be assessed at 5 min, 15 min, 1, 2, 12, and 24 h after extubation, whereas emergence agitation will be evaluated at 5 min, 15 min, 1 h, and 2 h post-extubation. While these scales are routinely used in clinical practice, their subjective nature necessitates additional objective assessment. Therefore, secondary outcomes include evaluation of perioperative stress markers (cortisol, alpha-amylase, neuropeptide Y) and adverse events (nausea, vomiting, pruritus, constipation, respiratory depression, altered consciousness) within 24 h. Procedures will be standardized, with morning surgeries to minimize circadian variations of the biomarkers, performed by the same team. Blood samples will be collected before and after intravenous induction.\n\nPostoperative analgesia will include paracetamol and NSAIDs, with fentanyl as rescue therapy.\n\nThe study hypothesis is that opioid-free anesthesia will provide comparable or superior analgesia, reduce the incidence of emergence agitation, attenuate the stress response, and decrease opioid-related adverse effects, thereby improving overall perioperative safety and recovery in pediatric patients undergoing cleft surgery.\n\nThe particular value of this study lies in the subgroup of children who will undergo at least two surgical procedures within the observation period. In these patients, each child will be exposed to both anesthetic protocols in separate procedures-once according to the randomly assigned regimen and the second time according to the alternative protocol. In this way, each patient serves as their own control, allowing for a more precise comparison of outcomes with a substantial reduction in inter-individual variability. This approach largely eliminates individual differences such as age, body weight, baseline hemodynamic status, individual sensitivity to anesthetics and analgesics, as well as variability in stress response and pain perception. Such a design enhances the internal validity of the study and enables a more reliable interpretation of the results.",[637,638,639,640,30,641],"Cleft Lip Palate","Orofacial Cleft","Agitation, Emergence","Analgesia Assessment","Pediatric",[643],"Anesthesia, orofacial clefts, pain control, emergence agitation","2026-04-22",{"date":646,"type":40},"2026-04-29",{"date":648,"type":40},"2024-05-16",{"date":650,"type":23},"2026-09-30",{"name":652,"class":47},"Iva Smiljanić",{"id":654,"slug":655,"hasResults":12,"nctId":656,"briefTitle":657,"officialTitle":658,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":659,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":464,"maxAge":660,"enrollmentInfo":661,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":346,"phases":4,"briefSummary":663,"conditions":664,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":68,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":666,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":667,"startDateStruct":669,"completionDateStruct":671,"leadSponsor":673,"locationsCount":48},"100486309","precision-analgesia-for-cardiac-surgery-100486309","NCT05612399","Precision Analgesia for Cardiac Surgery","Precision Perioperative Methadone Use in Adult Cardiac Surgical Patients to Reduce Opioid Use Adverse Effects While Improving Analgesia and Outcomes","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Elderly cardiac surgical patients over 60 years of age\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Methadone allergy\n* Morbid obesity (BMI \\>40kg\u002Fcm2)\n* Severe sleep apnea\n* Severe pulmonary disease requiring oxygen therapy\n* Preoperative mechanical circulatory support\n* Emergency surgery\n* Liver disease (liver enzymes more than two times normal)\n* End-stage renal disease requiring dialysis\n* Serum creatinine more than 2.0mg","110 Years",{"count":662,"type":23},400,"The proposed research is an important extension of an ongoing perioperative personalized analgesia and intravenous opioid pharmacogenetic research. This research focuses on two of the most commonly used oral opioid analgesics, oxycodone, and methadone in elderly adults undergoing cardiac surgery.",[30,665],"Cardiac Surgery","2026-04-11",{"date":668,"type":40},"2026-04-15",{"date":670,"type":23},"2026-05",{"date":672,"type":23},"2026-12-01",{"name":674,"class":47},"Kathirvel Subramaniam",{"id":676,"slug":677,"hasResults":12,"nctId":678,"briefTitle":679,"officialTitle":680,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":681,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":56,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":682,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":684,"briefSummary":685,"conditions":686,"keywords":688,"overallStatus":36,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":692,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":693,"startDateStruct":695,"completionDateStruct":697,"leadSponsor":699,"locationsCount":48},"100582949","evaluation-of-postoperative-pain-control-in-ear-surgery-100582949","NCT06869967","Evaluation of Postoperative Pain Control in Ear Surgery","Evaluation of Ultrasound-Guided Auricularis Magnus Nerve Block for Postoperative Pain Control in Ear Surgery","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients undergoing CWD and Mastodectom\n* Patients undergoing elective surgery\n* ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) physical status classification I-II\n* Patients over 18 years of age\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Anticoagulant use\n* Allergy to the drugs to be used\n* ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) physical status classification IV-V\n* Presence of infection in the area where the block will be applied\n* Patient's refusal to accept the block application or inability to cooperate with the patient",{"count":683,"type":23},56,[61],"Middle ear surgery is the most popular procedure in ear, nose and throat surgery. Increased sympathetic stimulation after surgery can activate the sympathetic system, causing hypertension and increased heart rate. As a result of these clinical conditions, hemorrhage can occur, which can impair the quality of the surgical field, which is undesirable in middle ear surgery.Clinical studies should be conducted with auricularis magnus nerve block applied in the perioperative period in middle ear surgery and postoperative pain scores.",[687,30],"Post Operative Pain",[689,690,691],"Regional Anesthesia","Ear Surgery","Auricularis Magnus Nerve Block","2026-03-09",{"date":694,"type":40},"2026-03-11",{"date":696,"type":40},"2025-10-20",{"date":698,"type":23},"2026-07-15",{"name":700,"class":47},"Kocaeli University"]