The different doses of sufentanil combined with nalmefene in bronchoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopy examination is a common clinical diagnostic method. However, due to its unique operational characteristics, the procedure often induces discomfort and pain in patients. The combined use of sufentanil and nalmefene offers advantages in effectively reversing opioid-induced respiratory depression without compromising analgesic effects. However, a comprehensive analysis report on the combined use of different doses of sufentanil and nalmefene in bronchoscopy examinations has not been reported. The aim of this subject is to investigate the application effects of different doses of sufentanil combined with nalmefene in bronchoscopy.

METHODS: Using computer-based and manual methods to retrieve relevant keywords, we searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang from inception to the present to find studies evaluating the application effects of different doses of sufentanil combined with nalmefene in bronchoscopy examinations. The quality of the included studies was assessed, and meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS: A total of six English-language articles, involving randomized controlled trials and reviews, and comprising 774 participants, were finally included. The control group used conventional therapy, whereas the intervention group used different doses of sufentanil combined with nalmefene. Meta-analysis results indicated that compared to conventional therapy, this approach significantly improved vital signs such as systolic blood pressure [SBP; mean difference (MD) =21.44, P<1×10-5 ] and diastolic blood pressure (DBP; MD =22.52, P<1×10-5 ), heart rate (HR; MD =25.16, P<1×10-5 ), and oxygen saturation (SpO2 ; MD =30.16, P<1×10-5 ). A total of 4 studies focused on sedative effects, and that of sufentanil combined with nalmefene was significantly superior to conventional therapy (P<1×10-5 ). Analysis of adverse events showed that the combined therapy had better outcomes in terms of hypertension and tachycardia incidence compared to the control group (P<0.001, P<1×10-5 ), and Riker sedation-agitation scale (SAS score) was significantly reduced (P<0.05). However, there were no significant differences in other adverse events (P>0.05). Subgroup analysis showed fewer adverse reactions at 0.4 µg/kg sufentanil concentration compared to 0.2 and 0.8 µg/kg, with only hypertension differing significantly.

CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, considering the use of sufentanil combined with nalmefene can improve patients' experience during bronchoscopy examinations. However, it should be noted that this approach may not be suitable for all patients, and clinicians need to choose appropriate analgesic and sedative methods for bronchoscopy examinations based on patients' conditions and individual differences. Furthermore, it is important to recognize that this study has some limitations and further research is needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this approach in other types of endoscopic examinations, as well as to compare the effects and safety of different drug combinations.