Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (808 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
An opioid analgesic that is used as an adjunct in anesthesia, in balanced anesthesia, and as a primary anesthetic agent.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Sulfentanil; Sulfentanyl; Sufenta; Sufentanil Citrate; Citrate, Sufentanil; R-30730; R30730; R 30730.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Fentanyl
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 2,471 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Sufentanil” (counts retrieved 2026-10-31). 619 of them (25.1%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 904 records.
Reviews account for 106 records (4.3%) and meta-analyses for 34. Randomized controlled trials number 1,067 (43.2%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up a comparatively large share of this literature, which means many treatment questions have been tested directly.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 904 |
| 2000-2009 | 475 |
| 2010-2019 | 473 |
| 2020 onward | 619 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 106 | 4.3% |
| Meta-analyses | 34 | 1.4% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 1,067 | 43.2% |
Method: PubMed query "Sufentanil"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-31.
Reading the evidence in drugs and chemicals
Studies of a chemical or drug can answer very different questions: what it is and how it behaves in cells and animals, how the body handles it, and whether it changes outcomes in people. Laboratory and animal findings often do not carry over to patients, and observational studies of exposures are confounded by who uses a substance and why. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to use, avoid, start or stop any substance or medicine; talk to a qualified clinician or pharmacist about your own situation. Check the dose, the species, the comparison group and whether a patient-relevant outcome was measured.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
Effect of Dexmedetomidine combined with sufentanil for post- thoracotomy intravenous analgesia:a randomized, controlled clinical study [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundFew studies have investigated the use of dexmedetomidine in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after thoracic surgery.
- Closing excerpt
- Trial registrationThis trial was retrospectively registered on 27 April 2016 at the Chinese Clinical Trial Register (number: ChiCTR-ONC-16008376 ).
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (174 words)
BackgroundFew studies have investigated the use of dexmedetomidine in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after thoracic surgery. This study to evaluate the effect of dexmedetomidine combined with sufentanil for PCIA after thoracotomy under general anaesthesia.MethodsNinety-seven adults patients scheduled for thoracotomy surgery. All two groups received PCIA with either sufentanil alone (control group) or combining dexmedetomidine with sufentanil (dexmedetomidine group). Hemodynamic measurements, visual analog scale (VAS) scores at rest and at coughing, Ramsay sedation score (RSS), analgesic consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) as well as drug-related adverse effects were compared at 2, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 h postoperatively.ResultsIn the patients of the dexmedetomidine group, compared to the control group, the pain scores at rest or at coughing during 48 h postoperatively were lower (P ControlConclusionThe combining dexmedetomidine with sufentanil for post-thoracotomy PCIA can improve pain control together with the decrease in sufentanil requirements, and improve postoperative patient's satisfaction compared with sufentanil alone in PCIA.Trial registrationThis trial was retrospectively registered on 27 April 2016 at the Chinese Clinical Trial Register (number: ChiCTR-ONC-16008376 ).
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 28249614 · DOI · PMC5333470
Dexmedetomidine with sufentanil in intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for relief from postoperative pain, inflammation and delirium after esophageal cancer surgery [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Background and aimsPostoperative pain can cause serious adverse reactions that severely affect postoperative outcome.
- Closing excerpt
- 000) that were associated with lower PCA-delivered cumulative sufentanil consumption and less PCA frequency until 48 h postoperatively (P ConclusionPatients receiving DEX in addition to IV PCA sufentanil for TLE exhibited better postoperative analgesia, fewer inflammatory responses and lower postoperative delirium categories and better health statuses.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (172 words)
Background and aimsPostoperative pain can cause serious adverse reactions that severely affect postoperative outcome. The present study evaluated the effect of dexmedetomidine (DEX) added to sufentanil in intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) on the relief of pain and inflammatory responses during postoperative recovery of patients undergoing a combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy (TLE).MethodsSixty patients undergoing TLE were randomly allocated to receive 1 μg/ml of sufentanil alone (Group S) or 1 μg/ml of sufentanil plus 2.5 μg/ml of DEX (Group D) for postoperative intravenous (IV) PCA. Postoperative pain relief, cumulative PCA requirements, inflammatory marker levels, delirium and recovery were assessed.ResultsA joint DEX and sufentanil regimen significantly reduced the area under the curve of numerical rating scores for pain at rest (NRSR) and coughing (NRSC) at 1-48 h postoperatively (P = 0.000) that were associated with lower PCA-delivered cumulative sufentanil consumption and less PCA frequency until 48 h postoperatively (P ConclusionPatients receiving DEX in addition to IV PCA sufentanil for TLE exhibited better postoperative analgesia, fewer inflammatory responses and lower postoperative delirium categories and better health statuses.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 32343308 · DOI · PMC7214400
Comparison of nalbuphine and sufentanil for colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- ObjectivesNalbuphine is as effective as morphine as a perioperative analgesic but has not been compared directly with sufentanil in clinical trials.
- Closing excerpt
- The decreased risks of respiratory depression and apnea make nalbuphine suitable for patients with respiratory problems.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (241 words)
ObjectivesNalbuphine is as effective as morphine as a perioperative analgesic but has not been compared directly with sufentanil in clinical trials. The aims of this study were to compare the efficacy and safety of nalbuphine with that of sufentanil in patients undergoing colonoscopy and to determine the optimal doses of nalbuphine in this indication.MethodsTwo hundred and forty consecutive eligible patients aged 18-65 years with an American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of I-II and scheduled for colonoscopy were randomly allocated to receive sufentanil 0.1 μg/kg (group S), nalbuphine 0.1 mg/kg (group N1), nalbuphine 0.15 mg/kg (group N2), or nalbuphine 0.2 mg/kg (group N3). Baseline vital signs were recorded before the procedure. The four groups were monitored for propofol sedation using the bispectral index, and pain relief was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale and the modified Behavioral Pain Scale for non-intubated patients. The incidences of respiratory depression during endoscopy, nausea, vomiting, drowsiness, and abdominal distention were recorded in the post anesthesia care unit and in the first and second 24-hour periods after colonoscopy.ResultsThere was no significant difference in analgesia between the sufentanil group and the nalbuphine groups (p>0.05). Respiratory depression was significantly more common in group S than in groups N1 and N2 (pConclusionsNalbuphine can be considered as a reasonable alternative to sufentanil in patients undergoing colonoscopy. Doses in the range of 0.1-0.2 mg/kg are recommended. The decreased risks of respiratory depression and apnea make nalbuphine suitable for patients with respiratory problems.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 29232379 · DOI · PMC5726642
Do Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms Affect Pain Intensity and Sufentanil Analgesia After Pediatric Scoliosis Correction Surgery? [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Pain management in children remains a challenge.
- Closing excerpt
- These results suggest SNPs should be considered in acute pain assessment.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (221 words)
Pain management in children remains a challenge. Postoperative pain assessment, which currently relies on behavioral and subjective scales, could be enhanced by the identification of single nucleotide polymorphisms effect on pain thresholds and opioid metabolism. This study explores the impact of nine SNPs-rs1799971, rs4680, rs4633, rs6269, rs4818 (with catechol-o-methyltransferase haplotypes), rs7832704, rs1801253, and rs1045642-on postoperative pain intensity, opioid requirements, coanalgesic use, C-reactive protein levels, and post-anesthesia care unit length of stay. This study involved 42 pediatric patients undergoing scoliosis correction surgery with postoperative sufentanil infusion. The genotyping was performed using real-time PCR with peripheral blood samples. Patients with the rs1801253 ADRB1 GG genotype showed significantly lower 24 h NRS pain ratings (p = 0.032) and lower sufentanil infusion rates at the level of statistical tendency (p = 0.093). Patients with the rs1205 CRP CT genotype had a shorter PACU length of stay (p = 0.012). In contrast, those with the rs1045642 ABCB1 GG genotype had a longer PACU stay by 0.72 h (p = 0.046). No significant associations were found for OPRM1 rs1799971, COMT, or ENPP2 SNPs. ADRB1 rs1801253may be a novel SNP indicating higher postoperative pain risk, while rs1205 CRP and rs1045642 ABCB1 could predict increased care requirements in PACUs. The ADRB1 rs1801253 SNP may also predict opioid demand. These results suggest SNPs should be considered in acute pain assessment.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 40331998 · DOI · PMC12026534
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Clinical pharmacokinetics of alfentanil, fentanyl and sufentanil. An update [5]
- Research article Comparison of Fentanyl, Remifentanil, Sufentanil and Alfentanil in Combination with Propofol for General Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials [6]
- Research article Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of sublingual sufentanil for postoperative pain management [7]
- Research article Intrathecal lipophilic opioids as adjuncts to surgical spinal anesthesia [8]
- Research article Sufentanil in anaesthesiology and intensive therapy [9]
- Research article Dexmedetomidine and sufentanil combination versus sufentanil alone for postoperative intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials [10]
References
- Dong CS, Zhang J, Lu Q, Sun P, Yu JM, Wu C, et al.. Effect of Dexmedetomidine combined with sufentanil for post- thoracotomy intravenous analgesia:a randomized, controlled clinical study. . 2017. PMID 28249614 · DOI · PMC5333470
- Tang C, Hu Y, Zhang Z, Wei Z, Wang H, Geng Q, et al.. Dexmedetomidine with sufentanil in intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for relief from postoperative pain, inflammation and delirium after esophageal cancer surgery. . 2020. PMID 32343308 · DOI · PMC7214400
- Deng C, Wang X, Zhu Q, Kang Y, Yang J, Wang H. Comparison of nalbuphine and sufentanil for colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial. . 2017. PMID 29232379 · DOI · PMC5726642
- Turczynowicz A, Równy J, Przontka W, Grzesik M, Jakubów P, Kowalczuk O. Do Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms Affect Pain Intensity and Sufentanil Analgesia After Pediatric Scoliosis Correction Surgery?. . 2025. PMID 40331998 · DOI · PMC12026534
- Scholz J, Steinfath M, Schulz M. Clinical pharmacokinetics of alfentanil, fentanyl and sufentanil. An update. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1996. PMID 8896944 · DOI
- Sridharan K, Sivaramakrishnan G. Comparison of Fentanyl, Remifentanil, Sufentanil and Alfentanil in Combination with Propofol for General Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Curr Clin Pharmacol. 2019. PMID 30868958 · DOI · PMC7011685
- van de Donk T, Ward S, Langford R, Dahan A. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of sublingual sufentanil for postoperative pain management. Anaesthesia. 2018. PMID 29219169 · DOI
- Hamber EA, Viscomi CM. Intrathecal lipophilic opioids as adjuncts to surgical spinal anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999. PMID 10338179 · DOI
- Maciejewski D. Sufentanil in anaesthesiology and intensive therapy. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2012. PMID 23801512
- Feng M, Chen X, Liu T, Zhang C, Wan L, Yao W. Dexmedetomidine and sufentanil combination versus sufentanil alone for postoperative intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Anesthesiol. 2019. PMID 31103031 · DOI · PMC6525966
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-31.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.