Comparison of Postoperative Analgesia Between Intrathecal Nalbuphine and Intrathecal Fentanyl in Infraumbilical Surgeries: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Spinal anesthesia is a widely used regional anesthesia technique for surgeries below the umbilicus, but postoperative analgesia is of major concern due to the relatively short duration of the local anesthetic. Various drugs were used as an additive to local anesthetic to prolong the duration of postoperative analgesia. This study aims to compare the efficacy of nalbuphine and fentanyl as an intrathecal additive along with local anesthetic.

METHODOLOGY

A total of 166 patients aged between 18 and 65 years belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I and II undergoing elective infraumbilical surgeries were included in the prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial. The patients were allocated into two groups of 83 each. Group N was given 2.5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine + 1 mg of nalbuphine (0.5 mL), and group F received 2.5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine + 25 mcg fentanyl (0.5 mL). Both groups were compared for postoperative analgesia, onset and duration of both sensory and motor blockade, intraoperative hemodynamics, and side effects.

RESULTS

All demographic data, hemodynamic parameters, and side effects were not statistically significant among the two groups. However, other parameters, such as the mean duration of analgesia, which was 267.27 ± 172.099 minutes in group N and 161.35 ± 14.957 minutes in group F; meantime for the onset of sensory blockade, which was 3.94 ± 1.769 minutes in group N and 5.94 ± 0.929 minutes in group F; onset of complete motor blockade, which was 7.10 ± 1.858 minutes in group N and 11.61 ± 1.218 minutes in group F; duration of motor blockade, which was 182.57 ± 13.011 minutes in group N and 112.53 ± 7.389 minutes in group F; and mean time taken for two-segment regression, which was 118.20 ± 12.61 minutes in group N and 113.72 ± 8.84 minutes in group F, were all comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Nalbuphine was found to be more efficacious for prolongation of postoperative analgesia with better hemodynamic stability.

Breast Milk Excretion of Dinalbuphine Sebacate Injection Administered After Cesarean Section

Ensuring the safety of analgesics during lactation is crucial for women of childbearing potential. Available data regarding the transfer of nalbuphine for postoperative acute pain via breast milk are limited to the postmarketing experience. This lactation study aimed to assess nalbuphine and dinalbuphine sebacate concentrations in breast milk from lactating women with postoperative pain treated with dinalbuphine sebacate extended-release injection (150 mg dinalbuphine sebacate/2 mL Naldebain). Breast milk was collected throughout the 5-day posthospitalization interval from 20 mothers injected with one dose of extended-release dinalbuphine sebacate intramuscularly. Maternal safety was assessed during the study period. Nalbuphine was detectable in 71% of milk samples collected from all mothers, whereas dinalbuphine sebacate was undetectable or below the quantitation limit (0.1 ng/mL). The mean nalbuphine concentration in milk was approximately 10.55 ng/mL, with the peak concentration reaching up to 12.7 ng/mL. The mean relative infant dose was 0.39% (coefficient of variation, 65%). The mean pain intensity at rest was reduced to mild pain from Day 2 morning to discharge. Overall, the maternal safety profile was tolerable. The breast milk of women who receive one dose of dinalbuphine sebacate injection postpartum contains low nalbuphine concentration. In addition, dinalbuphine sebacate injection potentially reduces maternal pain intensity during the first postpartum week and offers low toxicity risk among breastfed infants.

Optimal Post-Operative Nalbuphine Dose Regimen: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Patients with Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background and Objectives: Optimal opioid analgesia is an excellent analgesia that does not present unexpected adverse effects. Nalbuphine, acting on the opioid receptor as a partial mu antagonist and kappa agonist, is considered a suitable option for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, we aim to investigate the appropriate dosage of nalbuphine for post-operative pain management in patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and Methods: Patients were randomly categorized into low, medium, and high nalbuphine groups. In each group, a patient control device for post-operative pain control was programed with a low (0.05 mg/kg), medium (0.10 mg/kg), or high (0.20 mg/kg) nalbuphine dose as a loading dose and each bolus dose with a lockout interval of 7 min and without background infusion. Primary and secondary outcomes included the post-operative pain scale and nalbuphine consumption, and episodes of post-operative opioid-related adverse events and satisfactory scores. Results: The low-dosage group presented a higher initial self-reported pain score in comparison to the other two groups for the two hours post-op (p = 0.039) but presented lower nalbuphine consumption than the other two groups for four hours post-op (p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in the analysis of the satisfactory score and adverse events. Conclusions: An appropriate administration of nalbuphine could be 0.1 to 0.2 mg/kg at the initial four hours; this formula could be modified to a lower dosage (0.05 mg/kg) in the post-operative management of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Comparison of Ketamine-Xylazine, Butorphanol-Azaperone-Medetomidine, and Nalbuphine-Medetomidine-Azaperone for Raccoon (Procyon lotor) Immobilization

Raccoons (Procyon lotor) are frequently handled using chemical immobilization in North America for management and research. In a controlled environment, we compared three drug combinations: ketamine-xylazine (KX), butorphanol-azaperone-medetomidine (BAM), and nalbuphine-medetomidine-azaperone (NalMed-A) for raccoon immobilization. In crossover comparisons, raccoons received a mean of the following: 8.66 mg/kg ketamine and 1.74 mg/kg xylazine (0.104 mL/kg KX); 0.464 mg/kg butorphanol, 0.155 mg/kg azaperone, and 0.185 mg/kg medetomidine (0.017 mL/kg BAM); and 0.800 mg/kg nalbuphine, 0.200 mg/kg azaperone, and 0.200 mg/kg medetomidine (0.020 mL/kg NalMed-A). Induction time was shortest with KX (mean±SE, 10.0±0.7 min) and longest with NalMed-A (13.0±1.3 min). A sampling procedure was completed on 89% (16/18), 72% (13/18), and 89% (16/18) of the raccoons administered KX, BAM, and NalMed-A, respectively. Reasons for incomplete sampling included inadequate immobilization (one KX and one NalMed-A), responsive behaviors (one each with KX, BAM, NalMed-A), or animal safety (four BAM). Mean recovery time for KX was 32.8±7.1 min without antagonizing and 28.6±5.2 min following delivery of an antagonist. Mean recovery time was 6.2±0.8 min for BAM and 5.1±0.5 min for NalMed-A after antagonizing. Only with KX were raccoons observed to recover without use of an antagonist. Supplemental oxygen was provided to 23% (3/13), 72% (13/18), and 71% (12/17) of raccoons immobilized with KX, BAM, and NalMed-A, respectively. Hypoxemia at <80% oxygen saturation occurred in 0% (0/17), 27% (4/15), and 6% (1/16) of the raccoons administered KX, BAM, and NalMed-A, respectively; all raccoons fully recovered from chemical immobilization. All combinations could be used for raccoon immobilization; however, the need for delivery of supplemental oxygen to a majority of raccoons immobilized with BAM and NalMed-A may limit broader use of these agents for certain field studies involving capture, sample, and release of free-ranging animals from a practical standpoint.

Nalbuphine's Hemodynamic Impact in Ear, Nose, and Throat (ENT) Surgeries: A Comprehensive Review

Nalbuphine, a semi-synthetic opioid, has gained attention for its analgesic properties, but its specific impact on hemodynamics in ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgeries remains a subject of exploration. This comprehensive review aims to systematically analyze existing literature to understand the nuanced hemodynamic effects of nalbuphine during ENT procedures. Nalbuphine demonstrates promise as an analgesic agent in ENT surgeries with generally stable hemodynamic profiles. However, the variability in study designs and outcomes necessitates a cautious interpretation. The review underscores the need for standardized protocols and further research to elucidate patient-specific considerations, ensuring optimal utilization of nalbuphine in enhancing overall perioperative care for ENT patients.

Nalbuphine: an underrecognized battlefield analgesic and its utilization in combat care and peripheral areas

Battlefield injuries result in acute and severe uncontrolled pain, which can be reduced with the early use of analgesia. Apart from pain, battlefield injuries may also cause significant morbidity and a prolonged period of absence from active duty. Traditionally available opioids are known to cause various undesirable side effects such as respiratory depression that may worsen the condition of an already injured combatant. Nalbuphine is an opioid agonist-antagonist and has been increasingly used for postoperative analgesia over the last decade. In India, it is the only opioid analgesic that does not come under the Controlled Substances Act at the time of this publication. In today's world, where nalbuphine is being recommended for acute pain worldwide, its use in the Indian combat scenario needs to be conceptualized at the medical officer level (primary caregiver). This conceptualization will be discussed in detail in this review article.

Novel Opioids in the Setting of Acute Postoperative Pain: A Narrative Review

Although traditional opioids such as morphine and oxycodone are commonly used in the management of acute postoperative pain, novel opioids may play a role as alternatives that provide potent pain relief while minimizing adverse effects. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of action, findings from preclinical studies and clinical trials, and potential advantages of several novel opioids. The more established include oliceridine (biased ligand activity to activate analgesia and downregulate opioid-related adverse events), tapentadol (mu-opioid agonist and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor), and cebranopadol (mu-opioid agonist with nociceptin opioid peptide activity)-all of which have demonstrated success in the clinical setting when compared to traditional opioids. On the other hand, dinalbuphine sebacate (DNS; semi-synthetic mu partial antagonist and kappa agonist), dual enkephalinase inhibitors (STR-324, PL37, and PL265), and endomorphin-1 analog (CYT-1010) have shown good efficacy in preclinical studies with future plans for clinical trials. Rather than relying solely on mu-opioid receptor agonism to relieve pain and risk opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs), novel opioids make use of alternative mechanisms of action to treat pain while maintaining a safer side-effect profile, such as lower incidence of nausea, vomiting, sedation, and respiratory depression as well as reduced abuse potential.

Analgesic Efficacy of Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Ropivacaine in Erector Spinae Plane Block for Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Clinical Trial

Background

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is an easy and safe method for postoperative analgesia. However its effect lasts only for several hours. This trial was to investigate the effectiveness of different doses of nalbuphine as an adjuvant to ropivacaine in ESPB for patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

Methods

Patients scheduled for PCNL were randomized into three groups and received ultrasound-guided ESPB at T10 level for postoperative analgesia. Each subject received 28 mL of 100 mg ropivacaine solution mixed with 2 mL of normal saline (Group R), 2 mL of 10 mg nalbuphine (Group RNL), or 2 mL of 20 mg nalbuphine (Group RNH). Primary outcome was the time to first opioid demand. Secondary outcomes were morphine consumption, VAS scores within 24 h postoperatively, rescue analgesic requirements, and length of hospital stay.

Results

The median [interquartile range, IQR] time to first opioid demand was significantly longer in group RNH (8.70 [6.90,14.85] h) than that of group R and group RNL (2.90 [2.00,6.30] h and 5.80 [2.95,7.00] h, respectively). VAS scores (either resting or active) within 24 h postoperatively were comparable between the three groups, with the most significant differences especially at 4, 6, 8 h. Morphine consumption at 24 h postoperatively was significant for R group vs RNH group (median difference, 9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.57 to 16.43; p = 0.02).

Conclusions

Adding 20mg nalbuphine to ropivacaine in ESPB could significantly improve the effect of analgesia and prolong the duration of nerve blocks for PCNL.

Efficacy of intravenous nalbuphine for managing post-anaesthesia shivering: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials with trial sequential analysis

Background and Aims

Post-anaesthesia shivering is distressing and is observed after spinal and general anaesthesia. Nalbuphine, a partial mu-opioid receptor antagonist with kappa-opioid receptor agonist properties, has been successfully used to manage post-anaesthesia shivering.

Methods

After registering the review with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), we searched PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Ovid, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov with keywords for randomised controlled trials. The risk of bias-2 (RoB-2) scale was used to assess the quality of evidence. We also used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) guidelines to evaluate the strength of evidence and trial sequential analysis to validate the conclusions.

Results

Of the 240 articles, 10 were considered eligible for review (700 patients, 350- nalbuphine, 350- control or placebo). When compared to placebo, the success rate of nalbuphine controlling shivering was significantly better (risk ratio [RR]: 2.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.91, 2.94; P = 0.04, I² = 94%), but comparable to the control group drugs (opioids, dexmedetomidine, ondansetron, pethidine). Compared to placebo, shivering recurrence was significantly less with nalbuphine than with placebo (RR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.83; P = 0.01, I² = 61%), but comparable with the control group. The incidence of postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV) was significantly less with nalbuphine when compared to the control group (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.95; P = 0.02, I² = 37%), but PONV in the nalbuphine group was comparable to placebo (RR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.68, 2.12; P = 0.54, I² = 0%). Other outcomes, like the grade of shivering and hypotension, were comparable between the nalbuphine and control groups.

Conclusion

Nalbuphine successfully controls post-anaesthesia shivering and reduces the recurrence of shivering.

A MIXTURE OF NALBUPHINE, AZAPERONE, AND MEDETOMIDINE FOR IMMOBILIZING RINGTAILS (BASSARISCUS ASTUTUS)

We evaluated a combination of nalbuphine HCl (40 mg/mL), azaperone tartrate (10 mg/mL), and medetomidine HCl (10 mg/mL), a combination known as NAM or NalMed-A, in 23 ringtails (Bassariscus astutus) during 29 handling events for a radio-collaring study in southern Oregon, US, from August 2020 to March 2022. The combination was delivered to ringtails by hand injection at 0.075 mL NAM per estimated 1 kg body mass. The mean (± standard deviation, SD) dosage calculated post hoc was 3.366 (±0.724) mg/kg nalbuphine, 0.841 (±0.181) mg/kg medetomidine, and 0.841 (±0.181) mg/kg azaperone. All captured ringtails were effectively immobilized with a mean (SD) induction time of 13.24 (±3.57) min. The medetomidine and nalbuphine components were antagonized with a combination of atipamezole and naltrexone HCl with a mean (SD) recovery time of 2.48 (±1.94) min. This combination appeared to be safe and effective for immobilizing ringtails with a low volume dose, smooth antagonism, and rapid recovery. In addition, NAM does not contain any drugs that are US Drug Enforcement scheduled, which makes it useful for immobilization procedures by wildlife professionals in the US.

Efficacy and safety of flurbiprofen‑axetil combined with nalbuphine pretreatment on remifentanil‑induced postoperative hyperalgesia: A randomized clinical trial

Remifentanil-induced hyperalgesia (RIH) is a common and complicated issue in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), which significantly reduces patient satisfaction. The present trial was designed to clarify the individual and combined effects of flurbiprofen-axetil and nalbuphine on remifentanil-induced hyperalgesia. This randomized double-blind clinical trial included 120 adult patients who underwent LC at The Second People's Hospital of Wuhu. The individuals were randomized into a flurbiprofen-axetil group (F group), nalbuphine group (N group), flurbiprofen-axetil combined with nalbuphine group (FN group) and saline group (S group). The four groups were given flurbiprofen-axetil (50 mg, iv.), nalbuphine (0.1 mg/kg, iv.), flurbiprofen-axetil (50 mg, iv.) combined with nalbuphine (0.1 mg/kg, iv.) or normal saline respectively prior to skin incision. The primary outcome was the postoperative mechanical pain thresholds at the inner forearm and peri-incisional area. The secondary outcomes were the visual analog scale (VAS) and Ramsay sedation scale at 0.5, 1, 4 and 24 h after surgery, and any other adverse events. The pain threshold of the medial forearm in the FN group did not differ from that in the F and N groups at 24 h after surgery (P=0.310 and P=0.910, respectively). However, the pain threshold around the incision in FN group was significantly lower than that in F and N groups 24 h after surgery (P=0.001). The VAS of the F group, N group and FN group were all significantly lower than that in the S group at 0.5, 1 and 24 h after surgery (P<0.001). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of adverse events between the four groups. Single flurbiprofen-axetil and single nalbuphine effectively prevented RIH 24 h after surgery in LC. The combination of the two analgesic drugs, with different mechanisms of action, was not superior to single therapy. The present study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration no. ChiCTR2100045347).

Comparison of Nalbuphine Versus Clonidine as an Adjuvant to Intrathecal Hyperbaric Bupivacaine in Orthopedic Lower Limb Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Double-Blind Study

BACKGROUND

Nalbuphine and clonidine are used as adjuvants to intrathecal local anesthetics, but studies on their comparative efficacy have shown inconsistent results. This study aimed to compare nalbuphine, clonidine, or normal saline as adjuvants to intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine in orthopedic lower limb surgeries.  Method: Sixty-three American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I/II patients between 18 and 60 years old with lower limb fractures were randomized into three groups (n=21 each). Patients with contraindications to spinal block, bilateral lower limb fractures, or long-term opioid therapy were excluded. The subarachnoid block was given in L3-L4 interspace. Group N received 1 mg of nalbuphine, group Cl received 30 mcg of clonidine, and group C received 0.5 ml of normal saline with 15 mg (0.5%) of hyperbaric bupivacaine. Sensory and motor block characteristics, hemodynamic variables and side effects were noted, and the data were analyzed using Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney test, Chi-square test, and ANOVA followed by Tukey's test.

RESULTS

Patients receiving intrathecal nalbuphine (group N) and clonidine (group Cl) had a faster onset of the sensory and motor block than controls (group C) (p=0.000). The time to two-segment regression was more prolonged in group Cl when compared to group N (p=0.000). Duration of spinal analgesia was 216.75 ± 25.96 minutes, 292.86 ± 24.92 minutes, and 178.50 ± 16.06 minutes in groups N, Cl, and C, respectively (p=0.000). The 24-hour rescue analgesic requirement was maximum in group C and least in group Cl (p=0.000). The three groups were comparable to each other in terms of side effects.

CONCLUSION

Clonidine was found to be superior to nalbuphine as an intrathecal adjuvant with no significant side effects.

Efficacy and safety comparison of esketamine-propofol with nalbuphine-propofol for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in children: a multi-center randomized controlled trial

Background and Aims

Anesthetics such as propofol, esketamine and nalbuphine are used during the upper gastrointestinal endoscopy to achieve and maintain the desired sedation level. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of propofol-nalbuphine and propofol-esketamine in children.

Methods

A multi-centered study was performed at three tertiary class-A hospitals. Children between 3 and 12 years old undergoing diagnostic painless upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were included and randomly divided into esketamine or nalbuphine group to estimate the primary outcome of successful endoscope insertion. The patients were given esketamine 0.5 mg/kg and propofol 2 mg/kg intravenously in esketamine group, with nalbuphine 0.2 mg/kg and propofol 2 mg/kg in the nalbuphine group. The primary outcome was success rate for the first attempt of endoscope insertion in each group. Secondary outcomes included the safety of both anesthesia regimens and gastroenterologist's satisfaction. We used the Face, Leg, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale to evaluate the level of pain before and during the procedure and the Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium (PAED) scale to assess the level of agitation and delirium after awakening from anesthesia.

Results

Among 246 patients, 200 were randomly included in the final intention-to-treat analysis, with 100 patients in each group. The success rate for the first attempt of endoscope insertion in the esketamine group was higher than the nalbuphine group (97% vs. 66%; P < 0.01). The heart rate and mean arterial pressure after intraoperative administration in the esketamine group were higher than those in the nalbuphine group, while the delirium incidence during awakening was higher in esketamine group (all P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The success rate for the first attempt of endoscope insertion of children undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in the esketamine group was higher than the nalbuphine group, propofol-related hemodynamic changes were reduced accordingly, while the incidence of esketamine-related adverse effects could be high.

Clinical Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000040500.

Comparison of Two Different Doses of Nalbuphine With Isobaric Ropivacaine in Patients Undergoing Lower Segment Cesarean Section Under Subarachnoid Block: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Obstetric analgesia and anesthesia is a challenge in itself. It requires an understanding of the physiological changes during pregnancy and labor and the effect of anesthetic agents on the fetus and newborn. Because neuraxial techniques provide superior analgesia and materno-fetal benefits, their use have increased significantly over the past three decades or so. A combination of local anesthetics like ropivacaine with opioids like nalbuphine has been shown to have additive beneficial effects in subarachnoid block (SAB) in lower segment cesarean section (LSCS). However, the optimal dose combination of ropivacaine and nalbuphine to maximize their benefits and minimize side effects remains to be established. Our study has compared the clinical efficacy and safety of 0.75% isobaric ropivacaine (15 mg) with two different doses of nalbuphine (0.4 mg and 0.6 mg) when given intrathecally for LSCS in terms of quality of sensory and motor blocks, hemodynamic parameters, duration of effective analgesia, Apgar score in newborn, and associated side effects.

METHOD AND MATERIALS

In this prospective, randomized, double-blind study, a total of 69 parturients between the age of 20-45 years, belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I and II, undergoing cesarean section under SAB were evaluated. Patients were randomly allocated into three groups of 23 each by using the draw-of-lots technique. The patient and the observer were kept blinded as to which dose of drug (intrathecal) was being given to the patient. Patients in Group A received 0.75% isobaric ropivacaine 15 mg (2 ml) + 0.3 ml normal saline; patients in Group B received 0.75% isobaric ropivacaine 15 mg (2 ml) + 0.4 mg of nalbuphine (0.2 ml) + 0.1 ml normal saline; patients in Group C received 0.75% isobaric ropivacaine 15 mg (2 ml) + 0.6 mg of nalbuphine (0.3 ml). The total volume of drug solution in all three groups was 2.3 ml.

RESULT

 We found that the time to onset of sensory block was shortest in Group A (5.87±1.290 minutes) followed by Group C (6.00±1.087 minutes) and Group B (6.17±1.696 minutes); time to two-segment regression of sensory block was longest in Group C (101.74±8.996 minutes) followed by Group B (85.87±15.348 minutes) and Group A (65.00±7.071 minutes); duration of effective analgesia was longest in Group C (206.09±18.766 minutes) followed by Group B (183.91±15.880 minutes) and Group A (121.74±11.833 minutes); and time from SAB to complete regression of motor block was longest in Group C (216.52±15.553 minutes) followed by Group B (203.48±20.138 minutes) and Group A (174.78±14.731 minutes). Side effects were comparable among all three groups.

CONCLUSION

The optimal dose combination in SAB for cesarean section was 15 mg of 0.75% isobaric ropivacaine + 0.6 mg nalbuphine, with minimal side effects.

A Comparative Study of Intrathecal Fentanyl and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Hyperbaric Bupivacaine for Spinal Anesthesia in Lower Limb Orthopedic Surgeries: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Spinal anaesthesia is the most commonly used technique for lower limb orthopaedic surgeries as it is economical and easy to administer. Opioids as adjuvants to local anaesthetics during spinal anaesthesia have played a vital role in reducing post-operative pain qualitatively and effectively.

METHODS

This prospective randomised study was conducted on 100 patients divided into two groups scheduled for lower limb orthopaedic surgeries. Group bupivacaine fentanyl (BF) received 25 mcg of fentanyl with 15 mg of bupivacaine and Group bupivacaine nalbuphine (BN) received 1 mg of nalbuphine and 15 mg of 0.5% bupivacaine. The aim of the study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of intrathecal fentanyl and nalbuphine as an adjuvant to hyperbaric bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia. Duration of effective analgesia, haemodynamic parameters, onset and duration of sensory and motor block, adverse effects, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score were assessed.

RESULTS

Duration of effective analgesia was 388±24.88 minutes in the BN group and was higher (p-value <0.001) in comparison to the BF group, which was 304.70±15.76 minutes.

CONCLUSION

Nalbuphine was more effective than fentanyl in providing post-operative analgesia when used as an adjuvant to hyperbaric bupivacaine.

Patient-controlled intravenous administration of dexmedetomidine with nalbuphine versus sufentanil for post cesarean delivery analgesia: A retrospective observational study

This retrospective observational study aims to investigate the patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) of dexmedetomidine (DEX) with nalbuphine (NAL) versus sufentanil (SUF) for post-cesarean delivery management. A total of 300 women were evaluated who underwent cesarean section surgery with combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. After surgery, all patients were connected to a patient-controlled analgesia pump. The PCIA protocol was programmed with 0.11 μg/kg/h DEX in combination with 0.03 μg/kg/h SUF in Group I (n = 150) or 0.11 μg/kg/h DEX in combination with 0.03 mg/kg/h NAL in Group II (n = 150). There was no significant difference in incision pain and sedation level between the two groups within 48 h after the surgery assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) and Ramsay sedation scale, respectively. However, at 2, 6, 12, and 24 h after surgery, visceral pain at rest and at mobilization was alleviated in the Group II as compared with the Group I with lower VAS scores. Moreover, fewer adverse reactions were found in the Group II when compared with Group I, including postpartum respiratory depression, nausea/vomiting, urinary retention, and cardiovascular events. Overall, there was an increased patient satisfaction in the Group II as compared with the Group I. Based on the results of this study, it seems that adding NAL to PCIA with DEX, as compared to SUF with DEX, have an effect on reducing the intensity of visceral pain after cesarean section with less adverse reactions and higher patient satisfaction.

Injection Site Reactions Before and After Intramuscular Injection Technique Revision: A Postmarketing Analysis of NALDEBAIN® From 2017 to 2022

BACKGROUND

The NALDEBAIN® has been available since 2017, and high incidence of injection reactions in the phase 3 study has been reported. Since the first year in the market, the injection site reactions were still the majority of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in pharmacovigilance reports. The new intramuscular (IM) instruction and package was introduced in the middle of 2018. In this retrospective study, we analyzed the pharmacovigilance data and published postmarketing studies to investigate the impact of IM injection-related reactions in Taiwan between the period of 2017-2022.

METHODS

Individual case safety reports (ICSRs) and ADRs were classified by system organ class and preferred term. The reporting rate of ICSRs was used to evaluate the impact of the new IM instruction and package.

RESULTS

A total of 37 ICSRs were identified from pharmacovigilance reports. Among them, 51% of IM injection-related reactions were reported after one single dose of NALDEBAIN administration. The reporting rate of IM injection-related reactions in pharmacovigilance data dropped from 125.00 to 3.56 per ten thousand exposures after IM instruction and package revision in 2018. In addition, the percentage of IM injection-related reactions also reduced in postmarketing studies from 27.5% to 4.5%. There were no serious IM injection-related reactions found in the pharmacovigilance and postmarketing dataset.

CONCLUSION

Injection site reactions were common after intramuscularly administered oil-based agents during the first year which is later markedly reduced by changing the length of the needle and injection education.

Co-Administration of nalbuphine to improve morphine tolerance in mice with bone cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Kappa-opioid receptor (KOR) agonists are known for having opposite and/or different effects compared with Mu-opioid receptor (MOR) agonists. This study is aimed at clarifying the analgesic effect and tolerance of nalbuphine combined with morphine, and quantifying the mRNA and protein expression of spinal MOR and KOR in a mouse bone cancer pain (BCP) model treated with nalbuphine and morphine.

METHOD

BCP model was prepared in C3H/HeNCrlVr Mice by implanting the sarcoma cells into the intramedullary space of the femur. The paw withdrawal thermal latency (PWL) measured by thermal radiometer was used to assess thermal hyperalgesia. PWL testing was performed after implantation and drug administration according to the protocol. Hematoxylin-eosin staining in the spinal cord and x-ray in the femoral intramedullary canal was detected. Real-time PCR and western blot analysis played a role in detecting spinal MOR and KOR expression changes.

RESULTS

In tumor-implanted mice, the spinal MOR and KOR protein and mRNA expression was down-regulated when compared to that in sham-implanted mice (p < 0.05). Morphine therapy can lead to a decrease in spinal μ receptor expression. Similarly, the nalbuphine therapy can lead to a decrease in the expression of κ receptor protein and mRNA at the spinal cord level (p < 0.05). Morphine, nalbuphine, or nalbuphine co-administration with morphine all can extend the paw withdrawal thermal latency (PWL) to radiant thermal stimulation in tumor-implanted mice (p < 0.05). Compared with the morphine treatment group, nalbuphine co-administration with morphine delayed the reduction of PWL value again (p < 0.05).

DISCUSSION

BCP itself may induce down-regulation of the spinal MOR and KOR expression. A low dose of nalbuphine co-administration with morphine led to the delayed emergence of morphine tolerance. The part of the mechanism may be due to the regulation of spinal opioid receptors expression.

Sufentanil Combined with Nalbuphine via Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia After Cesarean Section: A Retrospective Evaluation

Purpose

This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy, opioid consumption, and safety profile of two patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) regimens (sufentanil combined with nalbuphine vs sufentanil alone) after cesarean section (CS).

Patients and Methods

Parturients (n = 1808) received sufentanil combined with nalbuphine (SN group) or sufentanil alone (S group) as PCIA after CS. The primary outcome was the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score with movement (NRS-M) at 24 h after CS. Secondary outcomes were NRS scores at rest (NRS-R) at 24 and 48 h after CS, NRS-M at 48 h after CS, cumulative PCIA bolus times, and opioid consumption during the first 24 and 48 h postoperatively, which was measured in morphine-equivalent doses.

Results

The population comprised 993 and 815 subjects in the SN and S groups, respectively. At 24 and 48 h after CS, the respective NRS-M scores of the SN group (4.62, 3.37) were each significantly lower than those of the S group (5.18, 4.01; P < 0.01 for both). The corresponding NRS-S scores were similarly lower in the SN group (0.96, 0.19) than in the S group (2.05, 0.92; P < 0.01 for both). After adjusting for covariates, the SN group still had lower NRS-M than the S group at 24 h after CS (estimate adjusted = 0.565, P < 0.001). The PCIA bolus times were significantly lower in the SN group than in the S group. The rates of bradycardia and respiratory depression were lower in the SN group than in the S group. However, the rates of dizziness and postoperative hypotension were slightly higher in the SN group, and those of nausea/vomiting were comparable.

Conclusion

Compared with sufentanil alone, sufentanil combined with nalbuphine for PCIA provided superior analgesia in parturient women after CS.

Comparison of Side Effects of Nalbuphine and Morphine in the Treatment of Pain in children with Cancer: A Prospective Study

Contemporary pain management regimens in children do not include the use of the middle step of the analgesic ladder, i.e., weak opioids. The aim of this study was to analyse the comparison of side effects and the therapeutic efficacy of morphine and nalbuphine in pain management in children with cancer. We conducted an observational, prospective study and analysed medical records of patients treated at the Clinic of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology of the University Hospital in Wroclaw (Poland), who developed mucositis during treatment. The efficacy and safety of both drugs were analysed, and the efficacy of pain relief and the incidence of adverse effects characteristic of opioid drugs were compared. The cases of 96 of children treated with opioid drugs nalbuphine or morphine were analysed. Nalbuphine therapy was accompanied by a statistically significantly lower incidence of side effects such as skin pruritus, constipation, and micturition disorders compared to morphine (p < 0.05). After the discontinuation of nalbuphine, signs of withdrawal syndrome were much less frequent than after morphine (p < 0.05). In Conclusion, nalbuphine used as a pain killer in children with oncological disorder is a safe drug. It provides stable analgesia in most children. Compared to morphine, the side effects typical of opioid use are less common, and the incidence decreases over time.

A Comparative Study of Dexmedetomidine versus Nalbuphine Used as an Adjuvant to Chloroprocaine for Daycare Surgeries Performed under Subarachnoid Block

Backgrounds and Aims

Nalbuphine or dexmedetomidine when used as an adjuvant to local anesthetic agents may alter the characteristics of subarachnoid block. The study aimed to compare the effect of adding these drugs as an adjuvant to chloroprocaine for spinal anesthesia.

Settings and Design

This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted at a tertiary care center.

Materials and Methods

After obtaining permission from the institutional ethical committee and informed patient consent, patients scheduled for surgeries under subarachnoid block were randomized into three groups of 50 each: Group C: Injection 1% chloroprocaine 40 mg (4 mL) with 1 mL normal saline, Group DC: injection 1% chloroprocaine 40 mg (4 mL) with dexmedetomidine 10 μg diluted to 1 mL in normal saline, and Group NC: injection 1% chloroprocaine 40 mg (4 mL) with nalbuphine 0.4 mg diluted to 1 mL in normal saline. Onset, peak, duration, and time to complete regression of sensory and motor blockade were noted. Side effects, if any, were noted and managed appropriately.

Statistical Analysis

Qualitative data were analyzed using Chi-square test and quantitative data were analyzed using Student's t-test and two-sided Mann-Whitney U-test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Group DC had prolonged time to onset, duration, and complete regression of sensory and motor block compared to Group NC and Group C (P < 0.001). Hemodynamic parameters, sedation score, and side effects were comparable in all groups.

Conclusion

Thus, nalbuphine is a better adjuvant to chloroprocaine than dexmedetomidine when administered intrathecally for daycare surgeries performed under spinal anesthesia.

Intrathecal Nalbuphine and Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvants to Bupivacaine versus Plain Bupivacaine for Orthopedic Surgeries under Subarachnoid Block: A Comparative Study

Background

In long bone surgeries, the severity of pain is more, demanding good intraoperative anesthesia, and prolonged postoperative analgesia. This is achieved in spinal anesthesia with adjuvants to local anesthetics, which act synergistically.

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine as adjuvants to bupivacaine versus bupivacaine alone in lower limb orthopedic surgeries under the subarachnoid block (SAB).

Settings and Design

This is a prospective, randomized, double-blind control study conducted on 60 patients belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Classes I and II, undergoing lower limb orthopedic surgeries under SAB.

Materials and Methods

Sixty patients were divided into three groups by computer-generated randomization. Group A received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 1.5 mg nalbuphine, Group B received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 10 μg dexmedetomidine, and Group C received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 0.5 mL of normal saline (total volume made to 3.2 mL in all groups with normal saline). Time of onset of block, duration of sensory, and motor blocks were noted. Changes in hemodynamic parameters, postoperative first rescue analgesia requirement, and side effects were recorded.

Statistical Analysis Used

Data were analyzed using SPSS 22 version software. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

There was no significant difference in the onset of sensory or motor blocks in the three groups. However, the time taken for regression of sensory block was longer in Group B that was statistically significant.

Conclusion

Intrathecal dexmedetomidine acts as a better adjuvant with bupivacaine in providing quality anesthesia, prolonged sensory and motor block, and good postoperative analgesia with less incidence of adverse effects compared to nalbuphine and bupivacaine alone.

Effective Doses of Nalbuphine Combined with Propofol in Painless Hysteroscopy

Purpose

Nalbuphine is becoming a common analgesic used in hysteroscopic operations. The aim of this study was to identify the median effective dose (ED50) and 95% effective dose (ED95) of nalbuphine combined with propofol in painless hysteroscopy.

Patients and Methods

Twenty-five patients aged 18–60 years with an American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of I–II who were scheduled for painless hysteroscopy were recruited. The initial dose of nalbuphine was set at 0.15 mg/kg and varied by 0.01 mg/kg according to the Dixon sequential method. The ED50/ED95 of nalbuphine combined with propofol for hysteroscopy was calculated by the probit method.

Results

The ED50 of nalbuphine was 0.122 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.092–0.137) mg/kg, and the ED95 of nalbuphine was 0.153 (95% CI 0.138–0.361) mg/kg.

Conclusion

The ED50/ED95 values of nalbuphine combined with propofol in painless hysteroscopy are 0.122 mg/kg and 0.153 mg/kg, respectively. Nalbuphine at 0.153 mg/kg combined with propofol is effective and safe for painless hysteroscopy.

Effects of nalbuphine on the cardiotoxicity of ropivacaine in rats

When combined with nalbuphine, local anesthetics show a longer duration of nerve block without increasing complications. However, no evidence is available concerning the effect of nalbuphine on the cardiotoxicity of local anesthetics. The objective of this work is to investigate whether nalbuphine pretreatment can increase the lethal dose threshold of ropivacaine in rats. Anesthetized Sprague Dawley rats were pretreated with different doses of nalbuphine (0.4, 0.8, 1.5, 3.0, 5.0 mg/kg) or NS (normal saline, negative control) or 30% LE (lipid emulsion, positive control) 2 ml/kg/min for 5 min (n = 6). Then 0.5% ropivacaine was infused at a rate of 2.5 mg/kg/min until asystole occurs. Time of arrhythmia, 50% mean arterial pressure- and 50% heart rate-reduction, and asystole were recorded, and ropivacaine doses were calculated. Nalbuphine (0.4-5.0 mg/kg) did not affect ropivacaine-induced arrhythmia, 50% mean arterial pressure-reduction and 50% heart rate-reduction, and asystole in rats compared with NS pre-treatment. The asystole dose threshold (in milligrams per kilogram) of group LE was higher than that of group NS (NS 28.25(6.32) vs. LE, 41.58(10.65); P = 0.04; 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 26.45), while thresholds of arrhythmia, 50% mean arterial pressure-reduction, and 50% heart rate-reduction were not affected by LE. Nalbuphine doses of 0.4-5.0 mg/kg pretreatment did not increase the threshold of ropivacaine cardiotoxicity compared with NS control; 30% LE increases the lethal dose threshold of ropivacaine in rats.

Effects of Nalbuphine on Gastrointestinal Function in Post-Operative Critical Ill Patients Admitted to the ICU: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Gastrointestinal (GI) function can be a significant problem in critically ill patients and is associated with detrimental outcomes. The administration of opioids for pain reduction is thought to contribute to GI dysfunction. We tested whether nalbuphine, a mixed agonist/antagonist opioid modulator, can promote GI recovery in postoperative critical patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and compared it with fentanyl, a selective mu opioid receptor (MOR) agonist.

Methods

This is a multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled trial to investigate whether nalbuphine improves the GI recovery in ICU patients after surgery, and compared it with fentanyl. The primary outcome was the time to first defecation. Secondary outcomes included the use of sedatives, enemas or laxatives, the acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) grade, the incidence of vomiting, and the lengths of ICU and hospital stays.

Results

We randomized 436 patients, and a total of 369 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (mITT) (185 to the nalbuphine group and 184 to the fentanyl group). The baseline demographic characteristics of the two groups were comparable after randomization. There was no significant difference in the time to defecation between the two groups [hazard ratio (HR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.74–1.19, p = 0.62]. There was no significant difference in the secondary outcomes between the two groups.

Conclusion

We found no evidence that nalbuphine administration can improve the GI function in postoperative critical patients admitted to the ICU compared with fentanyl. However, the CI was wide and we could not exclude the clinically important difference.

Pharmacometric Analysis of Intranasal and Intravenous Nalbuphine to Optimize Pain Management in Infants

Objectives

The objective of this pharmacometric (PMX) study was to (i) characterize population pharmacokinetics (PPK) and exposure-pain response associations following intranasal (0.1 mg/kg) or intravenous (IV, 0.05 mg/kg) administration of nalbuphine, with the goal to (ii) evaluate strategies for optimized dosing and timing of painful interventions in infants 1-3 months old.

Methods

PPK analysis of nalbuphine serum concentrations, prospectively collected 15, 30, and between 120 and 180 min post-dose, utilizing the software package Monolix. The final PPK model was applied to derive individual time-matched concentration predictions for each pain assessment (Neonatal Infant Pain Score, NIPS) after establishment of venous access and urinary catheterization or lumbar puncture. Drug exposure-pain response simulations were performed to evaluate potential benefits of higher doses with respect to a previously proposed target concentration of 12 mcg/L (efficacy threshold).

Results

Thirty-eight of 52 study subjects receiving nalbuphine had at least one concentration measurement and were included in the pharmacometric analysis. A two-compartment model with allometric scaling was applied to describe population PK data, with intranasal bioavailability estimated to be 41% (95%CI: 26-56%). Model-based simulations showed that the proposed efficacy threshold (12 mcg/L) is expected to be exceeded with an IV dose of 0.05 mg/kg for 6 min, with 0.1 mg/kg for 30 min and with 0.2 mg/kg for 80 min. This efficacy threshold is not achieved with intranasal doses of 0.1 and 0.2 mg/kg, whereas an intranasal dose of 0.4 mg/kg is expected to exceed such threshold for 30 to 100 min.

Conclusion

This PMX study confirmed that bioavailability of intranasal nalbuphine is close to 50%. Exposure-pain response simulations indicated that an intranasal dose of 0.4 mg/kg is required to provide a comparable pain control as achieved with an IV dose of 0.1-0.2 mg/kg. The optimal time window for painful procedures appears to be within the first 30 min after IV administration of 0.1 mg/kg nalbuphine, whereas such procedures should be scheduled 30 min after an intranasal dose of 0.4 mg/kg nalbuphine. Additional clinical studies are warranted to confirm these PMX based recommendations and to further optimize pain management in this vulnerable infant population.

: ABS0510: Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine in combination with propofol in upperlimb orthopaedic closed manipulation procedure- a comparative study in a tertiary health care centre in Tripura

Background &Aims:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Effective Doses of Nalbuphine Combined With Propofol for Painless Gastroscopy in Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: This prospective study evaluated the 50% effective dose (ED₅₀) and 95% effective dose (ED₉₅) of nalbuphine combined with propofol during painless gastroscopy.

Methods: Seventy-five patients who underwent painless gastroscopy were randomly divided into five groups (group N₀, N_0.05, N_0.1, N_0.15, and N_0.2), with doses of 0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, or 0.2 mg/kg nalbuphine in each group. Propofol was given to all groups as the sedative. The bispectral index (BIS) value, propofol dose, examination time, and awakening time were recorded. The number of patients with intolerance indexes (coughing, retching, swallowing, or limb movement) was recorded in each group. The ED₅₀/ED₉₅ of nalbuphine combined with propofol for gastroscopy were calculated.

Results: Compared with those of groups N₀, N_0.05, or N_0.1, the propofol dose and awakening time were significantly reduced in group N_0.15 or N_0.2 (p < 0.05). The successful rate of painless gastroscopy in group N_0.15 or N_0.2 significantly increased compared to that of group N₀ or N_0.05 (p < 0.05). When combined with propofol, nalbuphine had an ED₅₀ and ED₉₅ for painless gastroscopy of 0.078 mg/kg (95% CI, 0.056–0.098 mg/kg) and 0.162 mg/kg (95% CI, 0.134–0.217 mg/kg), respectively.

Conclusion: The ED₅₀/ED₉₅ of nalbuphine combined with propofol are 0.078 and 0.162 mg/kg, respectively, for painless gastroscopy. Nalbuphine at 0.162 mg/kg combined with propofol is effective and safe for painless gastroscopy in adults.

Antipruritic Effect of Nalbuphine, a Kappa Opioid Receptor Agonist, in Mice: A Pan Antipruritic

Antipruritic effects of kappa opioid receptor (KOR) agonists have been shown in rodent models of acute and chronic scratching (itchlike behavior). Three KOR agonists, nalfurafine, difelikefalin, and nalbuphine, are in clinical studies for antipruritic effects in chronic itch of systemic and skin diseases. Nalfurafine (in Japan) and difelikefalin (in the USA) were approved to be used in the treatment of chronic itch in hemodialysis patients. The FDA-approved nalbuphine has been used in clinic for over 40 years, and it is the only narcotic agonist that is not scheduled. We aimed to study (a) antiscratch activity of nalbuphine against TAT-HIV-1 protein (controls HIV transcription)-, deoxycholic acid (DCA, bile acid)-, and chloroquine (CQ)-induced scratching in a mouse model of acute itch; and (b) whether the effect of nalbuphine is produced via KORs. First, dose-responses were developed for pruritogens. Mice were pretreated with nalbuphine (0.3-10 mg/kg) and then a submaximal dose of pruritogens were administered and the number of scratching bouts was counted. To study if the antiscratch effect of nalbuphine is produced via KOR, we used KOR knock out mice and pharmacologic inhibition of KORs using nor-binaltorphimine, a KOR antagonist. For this aim, we used CQ as a pruritogen. We found that: (a) TAT-HIV-1 protein elicits scratching in a dose-dependent manner; (b) nalbuphine inhibits scratching induced by TAT-HIV-1, DCA, and CQ dose-dependently; and (c) nalbuphine inhibits scratching induced by CQ through KORs. In conclusion, nalbuphine inhibits scratching elicited by multiple pruritogens.

Eco-friendly fluorimetric approaches for the simultaneous estimation of the co-administered ternary mixture: etoposide, moxifloxacin and nalbuphine

Antineoplastic drugs, etoposide (ETO), are widely used in leukaemia. A patient with leukaemia has a relative infection with pneumonia treated by fluoroquinolones as moxifloxacin HCL (MOX). Because opioid analgesic as nalbuphine HCL (NAL) does not have a ceiling dose, it is used to manage the distasteful sensory in leukaemia. Consequently, green methods for synchronous spectrofluorimetric quantification of a ternary mixture of ETO, MOX and NAL were developed. The first approach relies simply on the estimation of MOX at 371 nm by conventional synchronous fluorimetric technique (Δλ of 60 nm). The second approach depends on applying the first derivative synchronous fluorimetric technique (Δλ of 60 nm) for simultaneous estimation of ETO and NAL at 257 and 273 nm, respectively. A good linear correlation was obtained in the ranges of 0.04-0.40, 0.10-1.00 and 0.50-5.00 µg ml-1 for MOX, ETO and NAL, respectively. Moreover, the proposed approaches were successfully applied for the estimation of the studied drugs in the pharmaceutical dosage forms. Additionally, the synchronous assessment of ETO, MOX and NAL in the spiked human urine was successfully attained by the facile protein precipitation technique. The mean % recoveries in spiked human urine were 99.49, 98.07 and 98.48 for MOX, ETO and NAL, respectively.

Nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine as adjuvants to ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block for video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy surgery: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adjuvants to local anesthetics, such as nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine, can be used to improve the quality and duration of peripheral nerve block effects. Dexmedetomidine has been successfully used as an adjuvant of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) with ropivacaine in video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy surgeries (VATLS). This study aimed to compare the effects of nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine used as adjuvants to ropivacaine for ESPB in VATLS.

METHODS

A total of 102 patients undergoing VATLS with ESPB were enrolled and randomized into 3 groups, each of which received a different adjuvant to ropivacaine. The visual analogue scale score, onset and duration of sensory block, use of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), rate of rescue analgesia, duration of postoperative hospitalization, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and chronic pain were measured and observed.

RESULTS

The visual analogue scale score, total PCA use, rate of rescue analgesia, and postoperative chronic pain in the ropivacaine with dexmedetomidine (RD), and ropivacaine with nalbuphine (RN) groups were lower than those in the ropivacaine (RC) group (P < .05). The duration of sensory block was longer and the first use of PCA occurred later in the RD and RN groups than they did in the RC group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

As an adjuvant to ropivacaine in ESPB, nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine are comparable in terms of the associated analgesia, sensory block duration, need for rescue analgesia, and incidence of chronic pain in patients after VATLS.

buprenorphine as an adjuvant in lower limb orthopedic surgeries: a prospective randomized controlled study

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intrathecal nalbuphine and buprenorphine as an adjuvant to heavy bupivacaine (0.5%) for spinal anesthesia in lower limb orthopedic surgeries to improve the quality of spinal anesthesia (onset, duration, and side effects) and prolongation of postoperative analgesia. Sixty patients were recruited into this single-centered, double-blinded, hospital-based, prospective, comparative study conducted in 2017–2018. They were randomly and equally (n = 30) allocated into two groups: nalbuphine group which received 0.5 mL (0.8 mg) of nalbuphine with 3 mL of heavy (0.5%) hyperbaric bupivacaine and buprenorphine group which received 0.5 mL (60 mg) of buprenorphine with 3 mL of heavy hyperbaric bupivacaine. Intraoperatively, onset and duration of blockade (motor and sensory), and time for first dose of rescue analgesia were recorded in both groups at regular intervals. Heart rate, blood pressure, Visual Analogue Scale score and side effects were also recorded postoperatively for 12 hours. The demographic parameters, time of onset of sensory block and motor block, and duration of motor block were comparable between nalbuphine and buprenorphine groups. The duration of sensory block in the buprenorphine group was longer than in the nalbuphine group. Time to the first dose of rescue analgesia was delayed in buprenorphine group as compared to nalbuphine group. In both groups maximum patients achieved maximum height of sensory block at 90 minutes. There were significant differences in the mean heart rate and blood pressure between buprenorphine and nalbuphine groups. Nalbuphine group patients achieved a Visual Analogue Scale score > 4 earlier as compared to buprenorphine group. Few side effects were observed in both groups. Intrathecal buprenorphine is a better adjuvant to 0.5% bupivacaine in the spinal anesthesia for lower limb orthopedic surgeries, as it provides longer sensory block and delayed administration of first dose of rescue analgesia with negligible side-effects. The study was approved by Institutional Ethics Committee of Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences (approval number: KIMSDU/IEC/03/2017) on November 23, 2017.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Dinalbuphine Sebacate, Patient-Controlled Analgesia, and Conventional Analgesia After Laparotomy for Gynecologic Cancers: A Retrospective Study

Objective

We aimed to investigate the effects of dinalbuphine sebacate (DNS), fentanyl-based patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), and conventional analgesia (CA) for pain management after laparotomy for gynecologic cancers.

Methods

A total of 137 eligible patients who underwent laparotomy through a midline incision wound for gynecologic cancer between July 2019 and June 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were divided into three groups as follows: the intramuscular DNS, intravenous PCA, and CA groups. Postoperative pain (POP) intensity as measured with a numerical rating scale (NRS), total consumption of analgesics, and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events were compared between the three groups.

Results

The DNS group showed significant reduction in NRS pain intensity than the PCA and CA groups on day 1 (4.8 vs 6.2, p < 0.01 and 6.2, p < 0.05, respectively), day 2 (3.0 vs 4.7, p < 0.01 and 4.8, p < 0.001, respectively), day 3 (2.0 vs 3.9, p < 0.001 and 3.5, p < 0.001, respectively), day 4 (1.1 vs 3.1, p < 0.001 and 2.9, p < 0.001, respectively), and day 5 (0.7 vs 2.3, p < 0.001 and 2.4, p < 0.001, respectively). The total consumption of morphine equivalents per day was similar between the DNS and PCA groups (142.8 ± 7.3 mg vs 137.7 ± 70.0 mg, p = 0.8032) and lowest in the CA group (11.7 ± 30.7 mg, p < 0.0001). The overall safety profile was comparable between the DNS, PCA, and CA groups. The patients in the DNS group complained less of dizziness postoperatively than those in the PCA group (27% vs 47%) and had less nausea than those in the CA group (13% vs 33%).

Conclusion

A single DNS injection was more effective for relieving POP than PCA and CA in the patients who had a longitudinal incision for gynecologic cancer surgery. DNS was well tolerated and had less adverse effects than PCA and CA.

Comparative Evaluation of Nalbuphine and Fentanyl for Attenuation of Pressor Response to Laryngoscopy and Tracheal Intubation in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background

In this study, our primary aim was to compare the efficacy of fentanyl and nalbuphine in attenuating the pressor response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia. The secondary aim was to observe hemodynamic response to pneumoperitoneum and to study the level of sedation using the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS).

Methodology

A total of 180 patients belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status class I/II scheduled to undergo elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia were divided into two groups of 90 each. group A received intravenous nalbuphine 0.2 mg/kg and group B received intravenous fentanyl 2 μg/kg, five minutes before induction of anesthesia. Technique of anesthesia was standardized for all patients in the study. Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded before giving the study drug; before induction; immediately after intubation; at one, three, and five minutes after intubation; before creating pneumoperitoneum; 15 minutes after creating pneumoperitoneum; and five minutes after release of pneumoperitoneum. Preoperative and postoperative sedation scoring was done using RASS.

Results

Immediately after intubation, HR was significantly higher in group A (p = 0.016). Both groups showed a rise in SBP immediately after intubation. Group A showed a significantly higher SBP in comparison to group B (135.97 ± 13.02 vs. 130.04 ± 13.33; p = 0.003). The DBP and MAP showed a similar trend. At one, three, and five minutes after intubation, HR, SBP, DBP, and MAP were similar between the groups. Post-extubation sedation score was significantly higher in group A (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

We found that fentanyl was more effective than nalbuphine in attenuating the pressor response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia. There was no significant difference observed between nalbuphine and fentanyl in the hemodynamic response to pneumoperitoneum. The depth of sedation post-extubation was significantly greater with nalbuphine.

Pharmacokinetic comparison of nalbuphine with single injection and patient-controlled analgesia mimic method in healthy Chinese volunteers

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Nalbuphine is a mu (μ) receptor partial antagonist/kappa (κ) receptor agonist analgesic and can be administered as a single injection or using patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in the clinical setting. However, differences in the pharmacokinetics of the two administration methods are unclear. Here, a clinical trial was performed to compare the pharmacokinetic characteristics and superiority of nalbuphine with a single-injection or PCA-mimic method to provide a reference for the selection of an appropriate administration method.

METHODS

Twenty healthy individuals were divided into two groups and injected with 10 mg nalbuphine intravenously using a single-injection or a PCA-mimic method (2 mg once for five times with a 30-min interval). Blood samples were collected, and safety was investigated. The liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was adopted to determine the concentration of nalbuphine in plasma.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The maximum concentration (C_max ) and area under concentration-time curve (AUC_0-t ) values of nalbuphine in the single-injection and PCA groups were as follows: C_max , 81.3 ± 24.7 and 39.8 ± 6.4 ng/ml, respectively; moreover, AUC_0-t , 110.3 ± 19.5 and 128.3 ± 23.0 h ng/ml, respectively. The effective analgesic concentration durations (EACDs) for the two administration methods were 1.39 ± 0.64 and 1.96 ± 0.91 h, respectively. Nalbuphine was well tolerated, and improvements were observed in the PCA group.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Compared with those in the single-injection group, the AUC_0-t and EACDs in the PCA group were similar, whereas C_max was decreased significantly. Therefore, the PCA method was more suitable for the clinical application of nalbuphine injection owing to the superiority of lower concentration fluctuation and the improved safety profile.

Nalbuphine for spinal anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Various adjuvants for prolongation of intra-operative and postoperative analgesia have been clinically studied, but the safety and efficiency of nalbuphine as an adjuvant to local anesthetics in spinal anesthesia remains unconfirmed. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis about the effect of nalbuphine as an adjuvant to local anesthetics in spinal anesthesia in regard to time of onset of sensory blockade and motor blockade, duration of motor blockade, 2-segment sensory regression time, the duration of analgesia, and incidence of side effects to provide a reliable basis for clinical application.

METHODS

Databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, Web of Science, CNKI, CBM, WanFang, and Viper, were searched for eligible studies. Data were extracted according to the proposed inclusion and exclusion criteria, RevMan version 5.3 and Stata 16 were selected to perform meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eighteen published studies including 1633 patients met the inclusion criteria. The results showed that adding nalbuphine to local anesthetics for spinal anesthesia can prolong two-segment sensory regression time (mean difference [MD] = 24.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 19.61-29.00, p < 0.001) and the duration of analgesia (MD = 118.11; 95% CI = 71.34-164.89, p < 0.001) without significantly increasing the incidence of adverse reactions in comparison to normal saline group. In addition, the analgesic effect of nalbuphine group was not statistically different from that of control group when compared with the potent opioid group, but the occurrence of hypotension (risk ratio [RR] = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.18-0.68, p < 0.01), the occurrence of shivering (RR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.08-0.43, p < 0.01), and the occurrence of pruritus (RR = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.10-0.53, p < 0.01) was lower than the potent opioid group.

CONCLUSIONS

Nalbuphine as additives to local anesthetics can significantly prolong the two segments of sensory block and the average duration of analgesia without increasing the incidence of adverse reactions when compared with normal saline group. In addition, the analgesic efficacy of nalbuphine served as an adjunct to local anesthetics was clinically not different from that of the potent opioids, but the occurrence of hypotension, shivering, and pruritus was lower than the potent opioids.

Benzimidazole Derivative Ameliorates Opioid-Mediated Tolerance during Anticancer- Induced Neuropathic Pain in Mice

BACKGROUND

Cancer is known to be the second significant cause of death worldwide. Chemotherapeutic agents such as platinum-based compounds are frequently used single-handedly or accompanied by additional chemotherapies to treat cancer patients. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral painful neuropathy is seen in around 40% of patients who are treated with platinum-based compounds, including cisplatin. This not only decreases the quality of life of patients but also patients' compliance with cisplatin.

OBJECTIVES

Nalbuphine, an opioid, is frequently used to treat acute and chronic pain, coupled with cisplatin in cancer patients. However, long term use of nalbuphine induces tolerance to its analgesic effects. We employed the same strategy to induce tolerance in mice.

METHODS

Here, we investigated analgesic effects of 2-[(pyrrolidin-1-yl) methyl]-1H-benzimidazole (BNZ), a benzimidazole derivative, on nalbuphine-induced tolerance during cisplatin-induced neuropathic pain using hot plate test, tail-flick tests and von Frey filament in mouse models. Furthermore, we investigated the effects of BNZ on the expression of Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-α) in the spinal cord.

RESULTS

The results showed that BNZ reduced tolerance to analgesic effects of nalbuphine and TNF-α expression in mice.

CONCLUSION

BNZ could be a potential drug candidate for the management of nalbuphine-induced tolerance in cisplatin-induced neuropathic pain.

Effect of caudal bupivacaine alone and with adjuvant fentanyl and nalbuphine to minimize the catheter-related bladder discomfort after tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomized study

Background and Aims:

Catheter-related bladder discomfort (CRBD) is a major cause of postoperative morbidity following urological procedures. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of caudal bupivacaine alone and with adjuvant fentanyl and nalbuphine to minimize the severity of CRBD after tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

Material and Methods:

A randomized prospective study was conducted on one hundred thirty-two (American society of Anaesthesiologist physical status I to II) patients who presented for tubeless PCNL under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into four groups control (C), bupivacaine (B), bupivacaine-fentanyl (BF), and bupivacaine-nalbuphine (BN) by using computer-generated codes. All patients received local infiltration at the procedure site while Groups B, BF, and BN received caudal epidural block (CEB) under ultrasound guidance after conclusion of the procedure. Groups B, BF, and BN received bupivacaine alone, bupivacaine-fentanyl, and bupivacaine-nalbuphine, respectively, for CEB. Patients were monitored 24 h for CRBD scale, visual analogue score (VAS), and duration of analgesia at 30 min, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18, and 24 h intervals. The analgesics were supplemented if the CRBD score was >2 and VAS was ≥4. Student t-test, analysis of variance, and Chi-square test were applied for quantitative, within group occurrence, and qualitative analysis respectively.

Results:

The CRBD scores were considerably lower in the Groups BF and BN as compared to Groups C and B during the first four hours. The duration of analgesia was significantly prolonged in Group BN (475 ± 47 min) versus BF (320 ± 68 min) versus B (104 ± 40 min) versus C (26 ± 14 min).

Conclusions:

The severity of CRBD can be reduced with CEB. The effect of CEB can be prolonged with the addition of opioid.

Comparison of Postoperative Analgesic Effects Between Nalbuphine and Fentanyl in Children Undergoing Adenotonsillectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Study

Objective: There is no universal agreement on optimal pharmacological regimens for pain management during surgeries. The aim of this study to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of nalbuphine with fentanyl in children undergoing adenotonsillectomy.

Design, Setting, Participants: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority and multicenter trial in 311 patients admitted to four different medical facilities in China from October 2017 to November 2018.

Main Outcome Measure: The primary outcome was postoperative pain score. The secondary outcomes were as follows: the numbers of patients who developed moderate or severe pain (FLACC ≥4 points); time to first rescue analgesic top up and the actual number of rescue pain medicine given in pain control in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), and additional analgesics requirement (received ≥2 rescue analgesics or/and other analgesics except study medications administered in PACU and ward); emergence and extubation time; Waking up time; time of PACU stay, and other side effects (desaturation, nausea/vomiting etc.).

Results: A total of 356 children were screened and 322 patients were randomized. The mean age was 5.8 (5.5, 6.1) in the nalbuphine group and 5.6 (5.3, 5.8) in the fentanyl group (p = 0.2132). FLACC score of nalbuphine group was lower than that of fentanyl group upon patients' arrival at PACU (p < 0.05). The time to first required rescue dose of pain drug for nalbuphine group was longer than for the fentanyl group (2.5 vs 1.2 h, p < 0.0001). Only one patient (0.6%) in nalbuphine group presented a slow respiratory rate (RR) at 9/min while 29 patients (18.5%) in fentanyl group developed slow RR ≤10/min in PACU. Meanwhile, SpO₂ was lower in the fentanyl group at 10 min after patients’ arrival in PACU (p < 0.05). The other profiles observed from these two drug groups were similar.

Conclusion: Nalbuphine provided better pain relief with minimal respiration depression than fentanyl in children undergoing Adenotonsillectomy.

Analgesic Effect Comparison Between Nalbuphine and Sufentanil for Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia After Cesarean Section

Background: Efficient maternal pain relief after cesarean delivery remains challenging, but it is important to improve outcomes for the mother and the newborn during the puerperium. We compared the analgesic effect of nalbuphine (a κ receptor agonist/μ receptor antagonistic) with that of sufentanil (a µ-receptor agonist) in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after cesarean section.

Methods: We enrolled 84 patients scheduled for elective cesarean sections with spinal anesthesia and randomized them into either nalbuphine or sufentanil groups (42 patients each). Pain scores, PCIA drug consumptions, degree of satisfaction, and adverse events were recorded as outcome measures.

Results: The pain scores at rest and uterine cramping pain scores in the nalbuphine group were lower than those in the sufentanil group at 6, 12, and 24 h after the operation. Also, the pain scores while switching to a seated position were lower in the nalbuphine group than in the sufentanil group at 6 and 12 h after the operation (p < 0.05). We found no significant differences in the PCIA drug consumption between the two groups. The degree of satisfaction in patients in the nalbuphine group was higher than that of patients in the sufentanil group (p = 0.01). Adverse events did not differ in the two groups.

Conclusion: PCIA with nalbuphine provides better analgesia and higher patient satisfaction than sufentanil after cesarean section.

Comparison of Intravenous Nalbuphine and Paracetamol on Maternal Hemodynamic Status, Neonatal APGAR Score, and Postoperative Pain given before Induction of General Anesthesia for Elective Cesarean Section

Background:

Stress response to endotracheal intubation and surgery is associated with exaggerated hemodynamic response and an increase in catecholamine levels which is deleterious to both the mother and fetus. We aimed to compare the effects of intravenous nalbuphine and paracetamol on maternal hemodynamic status, neonatal APGAR score, and postoperative pain using the visual analog scale for elective cesarean section under general anesthesia.

Study Design:

This was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical study.

Materials and Methods:

Sixty full-term pregnant patients, belonging to the American Society of Anaesthesiologist physical status Classes I and II, scheduled for elective cesarean section under general anesthesia were enrolled for the study. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups of 30 patients each to receive paracetamol (15 mg.kg^{− 1}) in Group Pand nalbuphine (0.2 mg.kg⁻¹) in Group N before induction of general anesthesia. Maternal heart rate, blood pressure, and oxygen saturation were recorded before infusion of study drugs, after induction, after intubation, and during surgery across all periods. APGAR score of neonates was recorded by a pediatrician. Time to reach visual analogue score-1 was recorded.

Results:

Significant attenuation of maternal hemodynamic response was observed with nalbuphine compared to the paracetamol group (P < 0.05). The time to achieve visual analogue score-1 in the postoperative period was higher in the nalbuphine group. APGAR score at 1 min was significant between the groups and at 5 min, nonsignificant difference was observed (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Nalbuphine and paracetamol are effective in perioperative hemodynamic stability of mother and APGAR score of neonates. However, nalbuphine had better hemodynamic stability as compared to paracetamol with a comparable APGAR score at 5 min.

Preoperative Administration of Extended-Release Dinalbuphine Sebacate Compares with Morphine for Post-Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Pain Management: A Randomized Study

Purpose

Perioperative pain management plays a critical role in the effort to promote enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). Pain is also the most concern for patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Naldebain (extended-release dinalbuphine sebacate, DS) is an oil-based formulation for intramuscular injection that has been designed for extended release and can be used for preoperative analgesia over a 7-day period. This study was aimed to compare the efficacy of DS injection with that of regular postoperative morphine administered when necessary for the management of post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy pain.

Patients and Methods

Forty-four patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included in this prospective study. The patients were allocated randomly into two groups, with equal numbers receiving preoperative DS versus post-operative morphine. A total of 21 and 22 patients completed the study within the preoperative DS and post-operative morphine group, respectively.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences between two treatment groups with respect to length of surgery, anesthetics used during operation, or the average visual analog scale pain score in the post-operative anesthesia care unit (PACU), and at 4, 24, 48, and 72 hours post-procedure. Morphine was required only during the first postoperative day among those in the DS group. Safety was comparable in both DS and morphine groups.

Conclusion

A single preoperative dose of DS provides sufficient analgesia along with a manageable safety profile and no interference with surgical anesthetics when compared to control cases that underwent surgery without preoperative DS treatment. This pilot study suggests that preoperative administration of DS is safe and may decrease the need for postoperative opioid use after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03713216.

Comparison of Duration of Analgesic Comparison of Duration of Analgesic Effect of Nalbuphine and Morphine as an Adjuvant to Bupivacaine in the Supraclavicular Block under Ultrasound Guidance

Background

Although many studies are available in the literature that has analyzed the effects of morphine, nalbuphine, and other opioids, no study had compared the effects of nalbuphine versus morphine as an adjuvant to bupivacaine in the supraclavicular block under the guidance of ultrasound.

Methodology

A randomized, double-blinded, prospective study was carried out on 60 patients of the American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I and II who were undergoing upper limb surgeries under the supraclavicular block. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups (n = 30). Group N received 20 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine with 50 μg.kg^-1 of nalbuphine, while Group M received 20 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine with 50 μg.kg^-1 of morphine. The characteristics of sensory and motor blocks, hemodynamic changes, duration of analgesia, adverse effects, and analgesic requirements were studied at different time intervals.

Results

In Group N, there was a statistically significant reduction in the time of onset of sensory block (9.9 ± 3.0 vs. 12.2 ± 2.6 min, P = 0.002) and motor block (14.4 ± 3.6 vs. 19.4 ± 3.6 min, P = 0.0005). The duration of sensory and motor blockade and duration of analgesia were comparable. There was no statistically significant difference regarding block characteristics and hemodynamic parameters.

Conclusion

Nalbuphine when added to bupivacaine as an adjuvant had significantly shortened the time of onset of sensory and motor blockade than morphine. However, the duration of analgesia, sensory and motor blockade of nalbuphine versus morphine were comparable.

Effects of dezocine, morphine and nalbuphine on electropain threshold, temperature pain threshold and cardiac function in rats with myocardial ischemia

BACKGROUND

Myocardial ischemia (MI) could cause many complications, such as arrhythmia, ischemic cardiomyopathy, which could lead to angina and myocardial infarction. The clinical efficacy of dezocine, morphine and nalbuphine are becoming dominated in China market. This aim of this study was to investigate the effects of dezocine, morphine and nalbuphine on electrical pain threshold, temperature pain threshold and cardiac function in rats with MI.

METHODS

A rat model of MI was established by ligating the coronary artery. Rats in the model group were injected with dezocine, morphine, nalbuphine and 0.9% normal saline. The effects of the three analgesics on MI rats were evaluated by comparing the electrical pain threshold, temperature pain threshold, and cardiac function index.

RESULTS

The electrocardiogram revealed that the model of MI was successful. The results of the electrical pain threshold and temperature pain threshold tests revealed that nalbuphine was the most sensitive after medication, followed by dezocine, and the sensitivity of morphine was the lowest. These three drugs reached its peak at two hours after administration. The analgesic effect of dezocine on electrical stimulation was the best, while nalbuphine had the best effect on temperature. The efficacy of dezocine decreased with time, while morphine basically failed at four hours after administration. The peak time of these three kinds of analgesics was selected to detect the cardiac function index in each group. Morphine had the least influence on the cardiac function index of rats, followed by nalbuphine and dezocine.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that the analgesic effect of nalbuphine had the earliest and best effect with the longest duration on temperature, and had less influence and higher safety in the cardiac function test of MI rats. Hence, nalbuphine is a relatively good analgesic for MI patients. The present study provides a database for the selection of analgesics in patients with MI.

Preemptive Nalbuphine Attenuates Remifentanil-Induced Postoperative Hyperalgesia After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Background

Remifentanil-induced hyperalgesia (RIH) is a paradoxical phenomenon that may increase sensitivity to painful stimuli. Nalbuphine, which is both a μ-receptor antagonist and κ-receptor agonist, may affect RIH. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of nalbuphine on RIH during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

A total of 96 patients were divided into the following four groups: 0.4 μg/kg/min of remifentanil with 0.2 mg/kg of nalbuphine (HRNA), 0.4 μg/kg/min of remifentanil with saline (HRSA), 0.1 μg/kg/min of remifentanil with 0.2 mg/kg of nalbuphine (LRNA), and 0.1 μg/kg/min of remifentanil with saline (LRSA). The pain thresholds of postoperative mechanical hyperalgesia were measured with von Frey filaments. Pain intensity and analgesic consumption were recorded up to 48 h after surgery.

Results

Pain thresholds on the inner forearm decreased in the HRSA group compared with the HRNA (P = 0.0167), LRNA (P = 0.0027), and LRSA (P = 0.0318) groups at 24 h after surgery. Pain thresholds on the peri-incisional area decreased in the HRSA group compared with HRNA, LRNA, and LRSA (all P < 0.0001) groups at 24 h after surgery. Patients in the HRNA group showed lower numeric rating scale scores at 1 h (P = 0.0159), 3 h (P = 0.0118), 6 h (P = 0.0213), and 12 h (P = 0.0118) than those in the HRSA group. Postoperative requirement for sufentanil was greater in the HRSA group than the HRNA group during the first 3 h (P = 0.0321) and second 3 h (P = 0.0040). Postoperative sufentanil consumption was also greater in the LRSA group than in the LRNA group during the first 3 h (P = 0.0321) and second 3 h (P = 0.0416).

Conclusion

Preemptive nalbuphine can ameliorate postoperative hyperalgesia induced by high-dose remifentanil in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Nalbuphine versus Midazolam as an Adjuvant to Intrathecal Bupivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Section

Background and Purpose

Adding adjuvants to intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine provides long analgesic duration with less adverse effects. The aim of this study was to compare intrathecal nalbuphine versus midazolam in patients undergoing cesarean section.

Clinical Trial ID

NCT03918187.

Patients and Methods

This was a prospective randomized controlled study conducted on 90 females undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia who were randomly allocated to three equal groups of 30 patients each: group C received hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg plus 0.5 mL saline, group N received hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg plus 1 mg nalbuphine, group M received hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg plus 2.5 mg midazolam. The onset and duration of sensory and motor block, effective analgesic time, analgesic requirements, adverse effects, sedation, and Apgar scores were recorded.

Results

There was significant rapid onset of sensory and motor block (1.95±.44 and 3.50±0.43 min) with slower regression of sensory block and time to bromage I (211.6±13.2 and 219.8±20.2 min) in group N compared to groups M, C (p < 0.001), with statistically significant rapid onset and long duration of both blocks in group M compared to C (p<0.001). The effective analgesic time was significantly prolonged in group N (263.7±16.3) compared to groups M and C (224.2 ± 18.6, 185.5±17.45), respectively, (p<0.001) and prolonged in group M compared to C (p<0.001), with increase in analgesic requirement in group C compared to groups N and M (p<0.001) and no significant difference between groups N and M. There was higher sedation score in groups N, M (1.78±0.63, 2.75±0.54), respectively, compared to group C (0.61±0.12) (p<0.001) with lower Apgar score in group M (6.9±0.73) at one minute than in groups N, C (7.1±0.91, 7.7±0.84) (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between groups regarding the adverse effects.

Conclusion

Adding 1 mg nalbuphine to 12.5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine provided more effective postoperative analgesia than adding 2.5 mg midazolam, with less non-significant adverse effects in midazolam group in patients undergoing elective cesarean section.

The 95% effective dose of nalbuphine in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia for patients undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy compared to equivalent sufentanil

PURPOSE

To evaluate the 95% effective dose of nalbuphine in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) by the sequential method and compare the analgesia efficacy with the equivalent dose of sufentanil on patients undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy.

METHODS

In the first part, we defined a successful analgesia as the highest VAS ≤3 in 24 hours postoperatively. On the contrary, a failed analgesia was the highest VAS>3. According to the last patient's outcome, the next patients would be given an increase or decreased dose grade. This process ended up with 9 cross-over points. In the second part, 60 patients undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy were selected. They were randomly divided into 2 groups (n = 30 each group): receiving sufentanil 1.78 μg/kg (group S) and nalbuphine 1.78 mg/kg (group N). PCIA pump was given at the end of the operation with 5 mL bonus loading. The total amount of PCIA was 100 mL and programmed to deliver 0.5 mL each time with a lockout interval of 15 minutes and the background infusion amount of 2 mL/h. The VAS score and Ramsay score of were collected after the operation, the number of effective pressing times of PCIA were also recorded. Adverse reactions were documented in detail.

RESULTS

The 95% effective dose of nalbuphine in PCIA on patients undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy was 1.78 mg/kg. There was no significant difference in VAS between the sufentanil group and the nalbuphine groups (P > .05), but the number of the use of PCIA in the group S was more than that in the group N obviously (P <.05). The group S has a lower ramsay sedation score than group N at every time point. (P <.05). The incidence of nausea and vomiting was not statistically significant differences between two groups in the first 24 hours after colonoscopy (P >  q .05).

CONCLUSION

Nalbuphine 1.78 mg/kg in PCIA is recommended for the patients undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy. And nalbuphine is a reasonable alternative to sufentanil when used in PCIA.

Effect of nalbuphine on patient controlled intravenous analgesia after radical resection of colon cancer

Effect of nalbuphine on patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after radical resection of colon cancer was explored. Retrospective analyses of 100 patients who underwent elective laparoscopic radical resection of colon cancer in Xiang Yang No. 1 People's Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine from June 2014 to December 2016 were made. Forty-seven patients were treated with nalbuphine as experimental group and 53 cases were treated with morphine as control group. All patients received PCIA after surgery. According to visual analogue scale (VAS), pain degree at 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 h after surgery, total dosage of analgesia pump, total times and effective times of pressing were evaluated. Analgesic satisfaction rate, and adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting, dizziness and headache at the same time were observed and recorded. The postoperative VAS in the experimental group was evidently lower than that in the control group (P<0.05) at 8, 12 and 24 h after surgery, which was statistically significant. There was no significant difference in postoperative VAS between experimental group and control group at 2 and 4 h after surgery (P>0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions to nausea and vomiting in the experimental group was low. There was no significant difference in the total dosage of analgesia pump, total times and effective times of pressing and analgesic satisfaction rate (P>0.05). After laparoscopic radical resection of colon cancer, nalbuphine is effective in PCIA, with low incidence of adverse reactions and high safety.

Efficacy of Epidural Dexamethasone Combined with Intrathecal Nalbuphine in Lower Abdominal Oncology Operations

Background:

Dragging pain during lower abdominal surgeries under intrathecal anesthesia is a common problem. Epidural steroid seemed to be effective in reducing intra and postoperative pain. Kappa receptor agonist like nalbuphine helps in reduction of visceral pain. Hence, this study was designed to detect the efficacy of epidural steroid dexamethasone with intrathecal Kappa opioid as a sole anesthetic technique in patients subjected to lower abdominal oncology operations.

Patients and Methods:

Patients were randomly allocated into two groups; epidural placebo group–control group (Group P) – Intrathecal injection of 20 μg fentanyl followed by intrathecal injection of (15 mg) of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5%, then (epidural injection placebo 15 mL volume of sterile saline 0.9%). Epidural dexamethasone group–study group (Group D) – Intrathecal injection of 0.6 mg nalbuphine followed by intrathecal injection of (15 mg) of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% then (epidural injection of 8 mg dexamethasone in 15 mL total volume using sterile saline 0.9%).

Results:

Group D recorded significantly longer times to 1^st analgesic request, sensory regression to S₁ and modified bromage Score 0 with significant lower number of patients that had abdominal dragging pain in comparison with Group P. Visual analog score in the first four postoperative hours, total postoperative nalbuphine dose in 1^st 24 h and incidence of nausea and vomiting were significantly lower in Group D. Heart rate and mean arterial pressure were comparable in both groups. Postoperative headache incidence was comparable in both groups. Both patient and surgeon satisfaction were significantly higher in Group D compared to Group P.

Conclusion:

Combined epidural dexamethasone with intrathecal nalbuphine as a sole anesthetic technique during lower abdominal oncology operations could be an efficient anesthetic technique that offered better block characteristics, with more analgesia and as a result it gained better patient and surgeon satisfaction.